Tuesday, March 15, 2011

Black and Blue

Attorney General Eric Holder famously (if not tactfully) called America "a nation of cowards" when it comes to discussing race honestly. Which is why we're sure he'll appreciate our honesty in saying that his brand of racism is entirely unacceptable.

Holder recently defended his decision not to prosecute Black Panthers who were threatening white voters by saying that the uniformed, nightstick wielding thugs were "my people." And sticking to his theme, Holder is now bending the law to put a lot more Blacks into uniform, and not only equip them with nightsticks... but also tasers, revolvers, and shotguns.

Specifically, the Department of Justice found that the Dayton police department had too few African-Americans...because not enough of them could pass the basic entrance exams. It wasn't exactly a lofty bar: there are two tests, and passing only required scores of 66% and 72%...until Holder got involved and ordered them to lower the bar. Now, applicants can get in with scores of 58% and 63%, which previously would have been an "F" and a "D." The policy change is so ludicrous, even the head of Dayton's NAACP is saying it's a bad idea and refuses to support it.

According to Dayton's president of the Fraternal Order of Police, "It becomes a safety issue to have an incompetent officer next to you in a life and death situation." No - really?

But as this administration has shown time and time again...at the Fort Hood massacre, in promoting women in the military without battlefield experience, and now on the streets of Dayton...they believe "diversity" is much more important than life and death, not to mention the law.

An opinion which should be acceptable only to a nation of cowards.




drjim said...

Looks like public education works reeeeal well, doesn't it?

Jazz said...

dr -- indeed it does. Why, when I was developing training materials for the Army in the 1970s, we were restricted to materials written to a fifth grade reading level! The last I heard, that had been reduced to a third grade reading level -- which back then was exclusively reserved for the Military Police. It seems as if the top "law enforcement official" in the US government finds even that level to be too cemanding for the cops in Dayton...!
> Right now, Barry and the Boyz seem bent on "fixing Bush's 'No Child Left Behind' act" -- and "act" is the appropriate word. My guess is that standards weren't lowered quite enough, as too many "children" were still dropping out of school. But, I suspect the ones dropping out would've stayed, if they'd been given a chance to learn something -- anything, instead of having to stick around, waiting for the least motivated slugs.
> On the other hand, had the "act" worked, we would be reminded that it was written by Teddy Kennedy's staffers, with much "help" from the professionals at the national headquarters of the NEA ... and no Republican would be named in the credits.
> I dread the outcome of the next "fix" of public education....

Anonymous said...

Context, Mister O'Keefe, is everything...

The Attorney General seemed to take personal offense at a comment Culberson read in which former Democratic activist Bartle Bull called the incident the most serious act of voter intimidation he had witnessed in his career.

"Think about that," Holder said. "When you compare what people endured in the South in the 60s to try to get the right to vote for African Americans, and to compare what people were subjected to there to what happened in Philadelphia—which was inappropriate, certainly that…to describe it in those terms I think does a great disservice to people who put their lives on the line, who risked all, for my people," said Holder, who is black.
Source: Politico

Shang said...

Another stereotype confirmed by this administration.

robert said...

So.....am I to understand from anonymous above that voter intimidation is OK? At least as long as it's black against white? Or it's OK because the black panthers are the black equivalent of the kkk? I'm just trying to figure out your context.

Chuck said...

Racism: the word has lost all meaning to me by now. By definition, as spelled out by this administration, I am a racist; because I am white, male, Christian, and conservative.

We are, indeed, a nation of cowards when it comes to matters of race ... and that cowardice almost exclusively belongs to the left.

Angry Hoosier Dad said...

Several years ago it was suggested, wrongly so, that blacks were not the intellectual equals of whites. That was an outrage and an insult and easily disproved by a quick examination of black scientists, inventors, philosophers, etc. throughout history. But when standards of achievement are lowered for no other reason but to make a police department more accessible to blacks, this is not an outrage and an insult? WTF! The very pursuit of separate standards for different races perpetuates racial discord; it does not "cure" it. Racial quotas are destructive no matter who's benefitting and calling it "affirmative action" is political wordcrafting to make it appear less ugly than it is. It tells the black American he cannot make it on his own efforts and must be aided by benevolent white masters (progressives). It tells white Americans the same thing about their black countrymen. How do either of them benefit from this? After the civil war, black colleges sprang up so that blacks in America could pursue an education equal to whites. Today, many blacks are allowed to breeze through Harvard so they can pursue their political aims without proving they ever learned anything of value. But calling Obama the "affirmative action president" is blasted as being equal to calling him "boy". In reality, the difference between 1850 and 2011 is that the chains are invisible, the slaves are willing and the plantation is the demeaning philosophy of liberalism. The white masters haven't changed a bit. They are the same racist Democrats they've always been. They just do a better job of acting like they mean well. Any wonder why I hate them so damned much?

Pete(Detroit) said...

OK, deamons of the interwebs ate this the last time, will try again (and this time, save before hitting 'post'..)

Robert - I think the 'context' Anon refers to is Holder's using "my people" to refer to blacks, particularly those struggling (against Democrats!) for the right to vote, in the south, in the early 60's. I have no idea one way or the other if he ever specifically in/excluded the New Black Panther hoodlums as part of the group he considers to be "his people" or not. Clearly, he feels they're worth different / special treatment than your average white band. Then again, he apparently feels the Islamist bombers deserve special treatment, too - think he considers them 'his people' as well?

As for the topic of the day, lowering standards et al, some tim eback my brother wanted to be a fireman. Got the degree, practiced climbing ladders w/ a weighted backpack, dragging a load across the lawn (to practice for hauling hose) etc. Come the test, he was #3 in the physical testing (haul hose, climb ladder, haul out dummy 'bodies' etc). Instead, the fire dept hired a 5'2" 160lb woman who was utterly unable of climbing ladders, or picking up a dummy. Apparently, it was more important to have a woman on the team than having someone who is actually, I don't know, able to fight fires and rescue people. So - my life in danger, for benefit of a quota. What a crock of crap

One of my favorite posters - scroll down to "Unique"...


Suzy said...

I am SO SICK of "equal rights" meaning black people should get the same perks as white people, without doing the work to earn them.

I try not to be racist, I have never considered myself to be racist... but in an honest confession, these days, minorities, and blacks in particular, are becoming so trained to despise white people that its starting to get difficult to deal with them in general.

It doesn't matter what sector we are talking about...police, medical, law....I want the people in there to be qualified. Their skin could be green for all I care...but I want them smart, and competent. If they aren't...they shouldn't be working there. Period.

How hard is that?

Manfred said...

What makes anyone think that an empty suit fed can dictate local police matters? Holder should be arrested - in Dayton - for simply being too stoopid to speak in public.

Pete(Detroit) said...

AHD - here in MI a few years back, we passed an "anti-affirmative action" law (amendment maybe?) that says race, gender, sexual orientation will have NO bearing on contracts, hiring, etc (obviously, this was since the Fire Dept situation related above). At any rate, I asked a black guy I was workign w/ at the time how he felt about it - turns out he was hugely FOR it. "You know, I worked my ASS off to get where I am, but people dont' show me any respect, they figure I was just a quota hire."

As to Libs = Slave masters, I *do* believe that some actually think they're the compassionate ones, genuinely wanting to 'help' and/or 'take care of' "the poor" (or what ever 'class'). In mistaking 'feelings' for 'facts' and 'desires / intentions' for 'outcomes' they really DO feel they're doing the right thing.
They are, of course, utterly wrong.
The rest actually are the power hungry manipulators who are happy to keep the special interest victims down and dependent, feeding at the government trough, and offering up praises and votes to the very b*stards who have the boot on the neck.
The second group, I think are genuinely evil. The first, merely idiots.

Suzy said...

Pete you make a great point! Mass hiring minorities makes the "good" ones look bad! Its unfair to make a black guy who worked hard for his position look like a "quota hire"!! People should be able to trust that ALL police worked hard for their position, no matter their color or gender.

Its similar to this immigration thing...I have a friend who worked VERY hard to become a citizen, and paid a lot of money, to come over from the Philippines. She is also very concerned about our government and is a staunch conservative. Its so unfair to let people over the border all the time and give them more benefits and make them do less work than these who have played by the rules.

Bottom line...I'm sick of only CERTAIN people having to play by the rules in our country. The rules should apply to EVERYONE.

Jim Hlavac said...

Holder wants to talk "cowardice," eh? I suggest he talk to his people, there in the black churches, who preachy unGodly things against gay people. His people aren't cowards on the subject, they're panic stricken. And they vote against us on every measure by 80%. Real live anti-gay Democrats! Who'd a thunk it? They call it the "down low." And they call us worse. Holder is such a hypocrite it's astounding. We're cowards? HA! They're like a bunch of sissies running from the KKK and the Black Panthers joined together. (Feel free, folks, to throw that in his face, and O's too. Both of 'em; you know.)

Chuck, you said it was because you were "white, male, Christian, and conservative."

Well, sir, I tack on "gay" and get the double whammy from Holder and his people. We smooch; they cringe. The cowards.

Jim Hlavac said...

And those three cowards, Obama, Holder and Oprah have the utter audacity to talk about they and their people being bullied? Decades ago? By Democrats in the KKK no less. So they need a separate set of standards today? To get a leg up to the highest paid entertainer, the attorney general's office and the presidency itself? What planet do they live on?

Meanwhile, from the gay media yesterday: "Nicholas Kelo, a student in Akron, Ohio, shot himself dead on Feb. 23 at the age of 13. His mother suspects Nick took his own life because he was bullied after classmates began suspecting he was gay before he joined band."

And the bullying is about them, the most powerful people on earth? The unfairness? They need protection? What a bunch of sniveling hypocritical cowards.

Holder should get out of Dayton and head on over to Akron, it's not far.

Pete(Detroit) said...

Suzy - you make a good point yourself.. "Their skin could be green for all I care...but I want them smart, and competent"
One of my OTHER brothers is a lib, and we were discussing O during the campaign. Pointed out that w/ precisely 1 "black" (great?)grandparent, being raised in Indonesia and Hawaii, going to Harvard, etc, etc he wasn't even 'really' "black."
He blew a gasket, saying that was the most bigoted, racist thing he'd ever heard.
Wait - to me, the color of his skin is the LEAST important thing about him, and *I* am the racist? W-T-F???

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

Readers- Lots of excellent comments this morning; I can always tell when we've hit a "hot button" when there's so much activity here. And why wouldn't there be? The whole "affirmative action" and "lowering of standards" thing has been out of control for a long time...but now it's just getting insane.

@AngryHoosierDad- You've really summed up things beautifully in your post. You're exactly right. And the destructive phenomenon you're talking about was perfectly described by George W. Bush as "the soft bigotry of low expectations."

How indescribably damaging to have an entire political party (especially Mr. Obama's party) take it as fact that an entire race of people can't compete intellectually without the intrustion of law enforcement and constantly plummeting standards? It destroys self-esteem in the intended beneficiaries, and increases racial anger.

And it doesn't have to be this way - but to change things for the better, liberals would need to let go of their self-concept of "Good Massa." And as we all know, liberals don't want to let go of anything that makes them feel good about themselves...no matter how many others are being hurt.

@Anonymous- It's fair to point out the full context of Eric Holder's remark - which is why I posted the link to the comment in full. He wasn't declaring that the black panthers were "my people," but he was declaring that black voters who had previously suffered discrimination were "my people." The problem is that this immediately shows his perspective of "my people" versus "your people"...black against white...which the Attorney General of the United States should rise above.

With a question as simple is as "Is it voter intimidation when two uniformed, armed men threaten people at a polling place unless they vote for a candidate of the correct race," only an idiot - and a racist - would first want to know "which race were the men?"

And ask yourself this: would you want a white Attorney General of the United States defending armed KKK thugs on the basis of the fact that "Caucasians are my people?"

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

Pete(Detroit)- When you honked off your brother by saying Obama isn't even "really" black, you got valuable insight into the mindset of liberalism. In their world, race has less to do with genetics than with ideology (mixed liberally with bullshit).

This is why, in liberal land, Bill Clinton was the first all-white Black president. And Barack Obama is the first half-white Black president. Clarence Thomas is an all-black White man, as is any other "race traitor" who has a drop of black blood but has a conservative political orientation.

Moreover, Hope n' Change boldly predicts that there will be yet another racial revelation about the president on Thursday: he's Irish. (By all means clip any such articles and send them to your brother!)

John the Econ said...

@AHD: Once again you nailed it.

The only up-side to moronic policy like this is that it once again exposes who the real racists in our society are: Liberals elitists.

Quotas are destructive on nearly every level:

o It's a fraud upon the taxpayers, who are forced to pay for lower-quality service.

o It's a punishment to non-minorities get passed over by those with inferior ability or performance, which then ferments actual racial tensions.

o It cheats those minorities who are capable of achievement on their own, by making lesser competent people their equals. And then it ferments the notion that they've only made it because of quotas instead of their own abilities and effort.

o It cynically provides the real racists with an actual reason to look down at minorities.

o It makes minority groups virtual slaves to the political establishment that artificially props them up.

I think 45+ years after the civil rights movement, most intelligent people realize most of the above. It's mainly the last reason that we still have poisonous policies like Holder's.

John the Econ said...

Oh, forgot some big ones:

o Either tells minorities that they're not good enough to compete in society without a government-imposed advantage, thus instilling a sense of inferiority...

o ...or teaches them that there's no need to bother, since they'll be provided an advantage anyway; just fosters the "get da man, they owe me" philosophy.

Pete(Detroit) said...

Stilt - "In their world, race has less to do with genetics than with ideology (mixed liberally with bullshit)."
So THAT's how they get away w/ expressing anti-Islamic terrorist sentiments is "racist" !!!!
Got it, now!

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@John the Econ - Thanks for the point by point breakdown. Very well done...which, of course, makes it pretty depressing reading.

Bobo said...

Law enforcement isn't what it was 50 years ago, or even 10 years ago, when one didn't need a college education to become an officer. The complexities of the job are very much different today. One has to be able to read what the law states as written, comprehend what the courts have interpreted the law to mean, and then be able to enforce and administer the law within the confines of those parameters, all the while knowing that by the time the case goes to court, the interpretation could have changed since the date of arrest, or the interpretation changed before the arrest but the ruling had not been published, in which case the information will be brought forward in trial.

Nearly every week court rulings come forth which tweak the application of reasonable suspicion, probably cause, stop and frisk, search and seizure, use of deadly force, and on and on. What I learned in college before the academy and then in the academy in 1977 was quite different in meaning and application when I retired in 2007.

I was neither the smartest nor most street-wise officer but in my opinion, having been a Sergeant for 23 years of my career, I saw a lot of officers not able to easily grasp the constant changes and interpretation of laws and rulings, thus they would continually make mistakes. In my opinion, a current day officer needs to be what I term "a critical thinker" - able to pull all the pieces together in their mind and then act accordingly in a matter of seconds while the lawyers and judges have months or years to ponder the implications of the officer's actions.

I don't think people who can't pass a standard police academy entrance exam, regardless of what color they may be, are the best candidates for the job and will not be productive and effective officers. Hiring lists are usually set up with the highest scoring applicant getting the job offer. That in itself doesn't guarantee they will be the best applicant though. Too many police administrators are book smart with insufficient common sense, thus they rise quickly through the ranks and don't have clue one about what it’s like on the streets and make bonehead decisions which affect the officer on the street, thus confusing the officer even more.

At one point in my career, my agency had several hiring lists to choose from based on gender, color, nationality, etc. in order to meet a representative workforce statistically in ratio to the population. This practice required our recruiters to actively seek out members of the desired classes of applicants to find the best qualified candidates, whereas; young white males weren't actively recruited but they somehow found their own way to our door. Personally, I think our recruiters did a fairly good job in identifying and bringing the desired classes to the agency because they sought out applicant from the military and colleges, not off the street.

Many police agencies now require applicants to have a college degree to be hired, promote, or both. As stated above, the complexities of the job are moving the process in the direction that at some point, college education for hiring will be the standard. I'm sure that will bring uproar of discrimination from those whom are "underprivileged" and cannot get a college education. Police work isn’t for everyone, but it should be for the best and brightest. On that note, one time our governor said “State employment should be for the Best and Brightest.” I created a certificate to hang in my work space that read I was one of the State’s Best and Brightest, just in case the governor showed up or someone asked. Always cover your bases. ;-)

Anonymous said...

Mr. Hlavac-
First, I am black and I am a police officer, not in Ohio but in another midwestern state. I think lowering the standards is absolutely ridiculous. Everyone should be held to the same standard. I abhor double standards; I never want or need anyting based on the amount of melanin in my skin. There are many more balcks in this country who feel the same as I do, some are just afraid to say it publicly.
Second on the issue of homosexuals. I am also a Christian. Black churches, or any real church for that matter are not preaching "ungodly things against gay people" as you put it. The sin of homosexuality (and yes it is sin)is specifically singled out by God as an abomination. It does not make one a "coward" to speak against it, no different than speaking out against the act of murder makes one a coward.
Homosexuality like commiting murder is an act a person chooses to do. Just becasue you or someelse chooses that lifestyle does not make it right, nor should it be shoved down the throats of American people becasue you choose to live that way. It is unnatural, and to be perfectly honest...disgusting to seek sexual satisfaction from someone of the same sex.
So, I guess you could say...and I'm sure you will that I am anti-homosexual(I don't use the word "gay" because I cannot see how anyone could be happy in bed with a same sex partner), I am also anti-murder, anti-pedophile, anti-drug user, anti-thief, and anything else that debases the morals of people.

robert said...

Detroit Pete,
I understand what Anon and what holder said. My "context" comment was a weak attempt at sarcasm. I just resent the fact that holder is the AG of the U.S. and he isn't going after these thugs. At the very least this is dereliction of duty.
By the way, holder looks like he's about 1/8 black to me.
This "my people" crap is pure horse poop. DO YOUR DAMN JOB! If he is letting this go, what else could he be completely ignoring?
The world is on fire and king hussein plays golf and gets his NCAA brackets ready.
This is simply unbelievable. There has never been a more inept, incompetant, arrogant, ignorant and destructive administration in the history of this country.
Please tell me I'm dreaming.

Andrew said...

AHD once again has hit the nail on the head. Well said, Sir.

"anonymous' police officer: thank you for your service.

Stilton: Spot on, as always.

Anonymous said...

@ the proprietor: I'm sorry, but I just finished reading the USCCR/NBPP report on the incident and nowhere did I find evidence of "two uniformed, armed men threaten[ing] people at a polling place unless they vote for a candidate of the correct race." They certainly seem to have acted in a threatening manner, and they were racist in their speech but there is no account from the witnesses that they were telling voters to "...vote for a candidate of the correct race." Perhaps you have evidence to the contrary.

JustaJeepGuy said...

You're living the dream. Too bad it's a nightmare!

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Anonymous (three above)- First, let me say it's always an honor and privilege to have a police officer here at the site. And I thank you for your service to your community and our country.

It's additionally useful to get your perspective as a black man on what these kinds of affirmative action and quota programs are doing to actually harm race relations in this country. There was a time - quite awhile ago - when some of those programs made sense, to make up for systemic inequities that were real and entrenched. But that time has passed.

Regarding your comments on homosexuality, I'll respectfully say that I disagree. I believe that churches have an absolute right to hold and express their opinions about what is and isn't moral.

But public policies and laws can't be based on anyone's theology (are gays sinners? Infidels? Atheists? Women?) Rather, our laws need to be based on actual science...and the jury is still out on whether homosexuality is a "choice," or is predetermined by genes as surely as race is.

I personally have tremendous problems with lewd, immoral, and socially destructive sexual conduct whether it involves people who are married or single, gay or straight. But I also have good friends in stable, longterm same-sex relationships who meet my personal definition of "morality" with no problem.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Anonymous (two or three above...this is getting confusing)- As much as I'm impressed by a government report (woo-woo!), you don't really need to read anything to see with your own eyes that the two Black Panthers were wearing paramilitary style uniforms, and one of them was swinging a police nightstick (hint: that's "armed.")

They also called white voters "crackers," and accused a black Republican poll watcher of being a "race traitor." So yeah, I think it's pretty clear that everyone present knew why they were there, and that race was the central issue.

And if a government report missed that...well... they also forgot to say that Nidal Hassan just might have been influenced by Islamic radicalism before he went on his shooting spree at Fort Hood.

Did I say they "forgot?" I meant they tried to cover it up.

Pete(Detroit) said...

robert - right on!

TheOldMan said...

I am fed up with hypehnated Americans. You are born here, you are an American. My parents came here from Europe and not once did I ever hear them refer to themselves are hypenated Americans. The only people who could describe themselves as hyphenated are those born elsewhere who came here. African American? Huh? How many self-proclaimed "African Americans" have ever even set foot on the African continent? If you go back far enough (Lucy), we are all Africans. Telling your children that they are AAs instead of As is not instilling pride in their "heritage", it is setting them up for a lifetime of victimhood. How many times have you heard someone say "I'm a Kansas-American"? It's sounds as stupid as it is.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

TheOldMan- I'm similarly sick of hyphens. It's great to celebrate your heritage with pride, but any time you add a hyphen to "American" you're declaring that you're only half American. And friends, that's no "American" at all.

Andrew said...

Teddy Roosevelt famously denounced self-hyphenization as the very antithesis of being an American.

Th African-American hyphenization persists because Affirmative Action offers an incentive to identify yourself as part of the entitled group and claim your goodies --no matter how tenuous or implausible the claim to group membership may appear.
So currently we have the irony of extremely lightskinned, vaguely Mediterranean-looking people who would in most former eras have made a conscious choice to 'pass' as white to further their advancement, and probably have been successful at being accepted as caucasian, now straining the definition to claim to be A-A because that's where the current advantage is. Until the A-A programs cease to exist, which will be very entertaining to watch.

One of the reasons Obama has spent so much in lawyer's fees, lost credibility and political capital keeping his birth certificate Top Secret may be that, in the segregated America of 1961, his young white Mom and white grandparents may have made the most prudent choice for that era and listed light-skinned Baby O as 'white'. Especially if they foresaw, correctly, that just-passin'-through Sperm Donot was about to up stakes and split on them for good. To have listed baby Barry as 'mixed' or 'Negro' in those days would have meant slamming most of life's doors in his face from birth, as those who lived through that era will never forget.

Personally I think that's the likeliest explanation. And wherever he was born, anywhere in the world in 1961, there would have been every advantage to listing him as 'white' , and no incentive to list him as anything else.

SC said...

The stupidity due to political correctness out of Washington never ceases to amaze me. Not one ounce, not even one drop of common sense or logic among all of those super intellectual Harvard & Yale, etc elites.
And this may very well take the cake; putting the lives of the citizens of Dayton at risk.

Bobo said...

If someone is born in America and has ancestry from another country, why don't they call themselves, i.e., American Irish or American Italian? Since when does the ancestor country have to come before the birth country? You are either an American or not. If you choose to include what your ancestry is, then add that second.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

Andrew- I enjoy tweaking the liberals on the matter of Barack Obama's birth certificate, but in my heart of hearts, I think you're correct. The original document has clearly been hidden, and much effort goes into keeping it hidden (no matter how the liberals and MSM claim that "it's been seen!" According to Hawaii Governor Abercrombie, it hasn't been.)

And the likelihood is that the real document doesn't show he's not a citizen, but that his mother said he was "white." Certainly no sin, and no big deal...except for the fact that it would undermine his otherwise nonexistent "street cred."

In what other way is Barack Obama "black"? His love of basketball? Sorry. His upbringing? His education? His elocution? His deep Christian faith? The "slave blood" which he claims runs through his daughters' veins, but not his own?

The man has used his "blackness" (along with white racial guilt) as his vehicle to political power. Does anyone, anywhere, think that a lightweight State Senator from Illinois who only served a few months (and voted "present") would have gotten any national attention if he was white?

And so the birth certificate is hidden, because Barack Obama resents his white mother for trying to obscure his past, just as he seems to resent all white people because his black father ran away.

It would be funny or pitiable if Mr. Obama's obsession with race - and an even greater obsession with "self" - wasn't now hurting so many people, and doing so much damage to our nation.