Black & Right » 2005 » February

I’ve personally been accused of being judgmental on more than one occasion. The reason is simple: I believe in black and white, right and wrong, and I’ve yet to see the choices evolve into right, wrong, and maybe.

Who Intimidated Whom?
Liberals can’t wait to show their compassion and love for those poor ol’ black people. For the foreseeable future, their mission will be to see that those rascally Republicans don’t intimidate us from voting. That mission was repeated nationwide during the last election cycle while not one example of “voter intimidation” was verified.

But just who is watching the Democrats?

“Five Democratic campaign staffers, including the sons of a congresswoman and a former city official — were ordered Tuesday to stand trial for allegedly vandalizing Republican get-out-the-vote vans on Election Day.

The five are accused of slashing the tires of 25 vans rented by the state GOP to drive voters and monitors to the polls. The felony charge carries a maximum punishment of 3 1/2 years in prison and a $10,000 fine.

Arraignment was set for March 4. The defendants include the sons of Wisconsin Representative Gwen Moore and former acting Mayor Marvin Pratt.”
– Associated Press, February 15, 2005

Seems to me THAT was a classic case of voter intimidation, but maybe I’m being a bit too judgmental. They probably had a very good reason to destroy an opposing campaign’s property.

Obviously those black staffers didn’t know that slashing the tires of Republicans was wrong. They probably grew up poor and understandably didn’t know right from wrong. We should all applaud their wanting to be involved with the “process” and it could also be argued that they were exercising their First Amendment right of freedom of political speech.

“They seemed to be excited, excitable, kind of gleeful, laughing and kind of joking.”
– Opel Simmons, Democrat presidential campaign worker

I’ll bet they were since their actions were only a result of their socio-economic environment and upbringing. That may be condescending, but what else is new with how liberals see blacks.

Eeeee-hah!
Former presidential screamer and new DNC honcho Howard Dean made a comment that most liberals are withholding judgment on. What else is new….

According to a February 11 Associated Press story, “Dean praised black Democrats for their party involvement, then questioned the Republicans’ ability to rally support from minorities.”

“You think the Republican National Committee could get this many people of color in a single room? Only if they had the hotel staff in here…. We have to never be afraid to say what we believe.”

I guess ol’ Howard only sees blacks as having the intellect to be “hotel staff” since it’s only been Republicans who have appointed two blacks as Secretary of State and one as National Security Advisor. Sure, Democrats appointed blacks to the exalted positions of Surgeon General, Commerce and Energy Secretaries, but those appointments hardly have any real meat to them.

Can anyone quickly name the current Commerce Secretary and does anyone know what he does? Do we care?

What should be most telling is the lack of outrage from Democrat blacks; they same ones who call black Republicans administration lapdogs and worse. As I wrote in an earlier column, these liberal blacks don’t want to make their massah mad.

If a Republican made a comment such as Dean’s, he or she would have been “Lotted” by politicians, the media, and rightfully so. But Democrats have never sought soul searching after ex-Klansman and senior Democrat Senator Robert Byrd referred to “white niggers” several times on Fox News Sunday. Most racially insensitive comments made by the Democrat brethren are usually glossed over by the left and those who love them.

I’ve always contended that some liberal elitists are the real racists in America and their social policies tend to back that up. But pointing that out again and again is judgmental and unfair… right?

Plaster Of Paris
This latest shocker:

“Private telephone numbers of celebrities have been unleashed on the Internet after an apparent hacking into Paris Hilton’s T-MOBILE SIDEKICK Address Book, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned. The FBI has opened an investigation into the hack, a government source said. The DRUDGE REPORT has confirmed the authenticity of many of the unlisted and super-secret numbers: private phone numbers and email addresses of Eminem, Lindsay Lohan, Christina Aguilera, Andy Roddick, Ashlee Simpson, Victoria Gotti, Vin Diesel, Anna Kournikova and many others!”

This may be judgmental but who in their right mind would give anything personal to a ditsy, spoiled brat, super-rich girl who appears to have frequent videotaped sex, just to have new and improved versions surface on the web every couple of weeks?

“One top star reached Sunday morning expressed total outrage at Paris. ‘I gave her my number after we met in Miami, I did not know she fucking kept it on her cellphone!’ the star explained.”

Not very smart, but then again we are talking about Paris Hilton.

More Adventure In L.A.
For all it had to offer, sometimes I’m really glad I’m no longer a transplanted Angelino.

A 13 year-old black boy, doing the wrong thing in the wrong place at the wrong time, was shot and killed by the LAPD when he repeatedly rammed a squad car with one he was driving. My judgmental tendencies dictate If not for the kid’s actions (like Rodney King), none of the foolish chaos that threatens to consume Los Angeles would be happening.

I have one question that I’ve never heard asked of the police. I’ve seen enough depictions of officers in target practice on television and in the movies, I assume the LAPD can hit almost anything they aim at. Maybe off ever so slightly during high stress collars….

Why can’t they shoot-to-wound? It usually ends up a shoot-to-kill against someone who has a legally lethal, but manageable weapon. Do they enjoy serving red meat to an LA Times that would love a riot to help win some Pulitzers and boost a sagging readership?

What’s up with the LAPD? T.J. Hooker could shoot the gun out of someone’s hand.

Shoot to wound. It couldn’t hurt.

Just a suggestion.

Sean To His Head
During one of last week’s ‘Hannity & Colmes’ programs, Sean Hannity was interviewing the father of a child who was asked to write an anti-war letter to President Bush for one of his middle school classes. At one point, Sean pointed out that he was against liberal bias in the classroom and that if a letter praising the war effort and the president were ordered, he would’ve objected to that too.

I don’t want to be judgmental again, but simply put… bullshit, Sean.

I’m as pro-Bush and pro-Iraqi liberation as anyone and hopefully as much as Sean Hannity. What I would hope is that both sides of an issue could be objectively presented to the kids, then two sets of letters could be sent.

Was that so hard?

Head Of The Class
I just saw a Fox News story about five hockey-playing students from the secondary school south of Boston I attended in the early 70’s, Milton Academy, expelled for receiving oral sex from a 15-year-old sophomore girl in January.

Now while Bill Clinton’s Surgeon General Jocelyn Elders said that kids having oral sex was an acceptable substitute for teen pregnancy, Clinton himself gave an intern a personal demonstration thus imposing his stature over an impressionable, immature subordinate in the workplace (a federal crime). Conservatives were demonized as prudes.

Again, I don’t want to be judgmental but the substantial rise of oral sex between the teens is a direct result of us being told to shut up about people’s personal lives. We were told what Clinton did was no big deal. Remember “If his wife doesn’t mind, why should we?”

The non-judgmental parents of the school’s students are reportedly divided.

Bill Clinton must have made quite the impression when he visited Milton Academy just last year….

Weaded Out
It may be judgmental, but if “author ” Doug Wead, onetime religious adviser to Bush were a Democrat bringing up old dirt about a Democrat president, Eleanor Clift would have a cow. Even when nothing new is offered, the usual media snipers are at it again.

Using secretly recorded conversations with George W. Bush during his father’s administration, Wead is now hyping his new book, “The Raising of a President”, by releasing them to The New York Times and ABC. I’m shocked. “Raising” seems to play up that “daddy’s boy” sentiment used by those who hate W most.

Wead said, “Ninety percent of the tapes have not been heard. He can see that my motive was not to try to hurt him. If I released all the tapes, it would be an act of betrayal. Most of them have never seen the light of day and never will.”

I wish I had the money to buy that bridge in Brooklyn.

“The cocaine thing, let me tell you my strategy on that. Rather than saying no, I think it’s time for someone to draw the line and look people in the eye and say, you know, ‘I’m not going to participate in ugly rumors about me and blame my opponent,’ and hold the line. Stand up for a system that will not allow this kind of crap to go on.”

Clift, on a talking head show asserted that George W. was conniving even back then how to sidestep questions. As a former candidate, I can attest to the fact that if one has political aspirations, one rehearses answers to positions years in advance. It’s kinda fun to watch the rabid amongst the liberals get strung along.

“Do you want your little kid to say, ‘Hey Daddy, President Bush tried marijuana; I think I will.’ … I wouldn’t answer the marijuana question. You know why? Because I don’t want some little kid doing what I tried.”

I find that more intellectually honest than “I didn’t inhale,” but that’s only me being judgmental.

“Look, James, I got to tell you two things right off the bat. One, I’m not going to kick gays, because I’m a sinner. How can I differentiate sin?”
– Bush describing a meeting with Texas preacher James Robison

Will all those sign-carrying protesters who called the president a racist, Nazi, gay-hating, terrorist, war criminal take some of their vitriol back, since behind close doors, George W. isn’t as bad as they made him out to be?

‘Course not. That would be judgmental.