As of now, I am in control here, in the White House

Tag Archives: race

Candace Owens Says Liberals Harm Blacks 50 Years After Malcolm X Said the Same

There are some African Americans who understand that what liberals have for them isn’t good and are bravely willing to say it. Candace Owens says it today, and it’s incredible how her comments on Mark Levin’s Fox show “Life, Liberty & Levin” questioning their motives echo those of civil rights leader Malcolm X half a century ago.

One day, I believe, more black voters will agree that liberal policies have destroyed their communities, and then they will return to the Republican party.

I don’t think I agree with Owens that liberal policies are racist. I’ll leave the name calling to them. But I think it’s obvious that in many cases, the impetus to help African Americans with policies that foster their dependency on government is more about making liberals feel good about themselves and turning blacks into reliable Democratic voters than it is about actually helping people.

In this video, Owens talks about how Democrats sought to demonize President Trump as a racist in order to herd black people to the polls to vote Democratic.

Is it plausible that racism is being used as a theme to turn black people into single issue voters? And the answer to that question is, of course, yes.

In the video below, Owens explains that Trump was willing to raise the politically incorrect question of whether the welfare state if benefit blacks.

Standing on a platform and saying to black America, what do you have to lose? Having everybody in the media interpret that as racism when in fact, what’s actually been happening to the black community is racist. The Democrat policies that have been inflicted in the black community are racist. When you talk about the welfare system, Lyndon B. Johnson in the proliferation of the welfare state and his great society act, right? Those are the things that were racist.

Trump was actually telling us, you guys are losing. So his courage and his strength is what I admire and the results that he’s already brought to this country in the 18 months that he’s been in office.

Now watch this fascinating video of Malcolm X questioning the motives of liberals supposedly trying to help black Americans. Note, as one of the commenters does, how civil the discussion and the disagreement is compared to what we get today.

“The fox acts friendly toward the lamb. And usually, the Fox is the one who ends up with the lamb chop on his plate,” he says. Not that he likes conservatives any better.

Obama “Deeply Disappointed” by Voting Rights Ruling

President Obama today said he was “deeply disappointed” by a Supreme Court ruling that states could no longer be judged by standards nearly 50 years old to determine whether their voting procedures require federal oversight.

Deeply disappointed? Really? Have we made no progress in five decades? Are we really at this point in danger of slipping back to the kind of voter discrimination blacks experienced in the 1960s and before?

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 requires Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia, Alaska, Arizona, and parts of seven other states to receive “pre-clearance” from either the attorney general or federal judges before making changes to voting laws.

The Court didn’t invalidate the principle that some states or areas require federal scrutiny. It merely said we’ve advanced enough as a society that new standards must be written based on current conditions, and that the punishment of states for what was done even before the civil rights era must be stopped.

Obama almost immediately released a written statement of outrage:

I am deeply disappointed with the Supreme Court’s decision today.  For nearly 50 years, the Voting Rights Act – enacted and repeatedly renewed by wide bipartisan majorities in Congress – has helped secure the right to vote for millions of Americans.  Today’s decision invalidating one of its core provisions upsets decades of well-established practices that help make sure voting is fair, especially in places where voting discrimination has been historically prevalent.

As a nation, we’ve made a great deal of progress towards guaranteeing every American the right to vote.  But, as the Supreme Court recognized, voting discrimination still exists. And while today’s decision is a setback, it doesn’t represent the end of our efforts to end voting discrimination.  I am calling on Congress to pass legislation to ensure every American has equal access to the polls.  My Administration will continue to do everything in its power to ensure a fair and equal voting process.

Note that last sentence. Get ready for some kind of end run around the Court.

This president, especially as our first African American president, was supposed to be about unifying the nation. How does it unite the country to continue to leave certain states and regions in the corner with a dunce cap on, degrading them despite decades of arduous progress?

Obama has reflexively aligned himself with the racial-politics-as-usual crowd instead of bravely differentiating himself and acting as the leader of us all. The new kind of politician we were sold in 2008, as we see time and time again, is no different than the old kind.

Here’s the crowd I’m talking about:

Biden To Blacks: Romney Kept Your Chains for You

Well, my first thought was that this was nonsense, and that Vice President Biden was using a figure of speech by suggesting Romney want to put people in chains.

But unfortunately, this is completely consistent with other Obama campaign efforts to inject race into the campaign – whether it’s Attorney General Eric Holder implying that voter ID laws are about suppressing the black vote, or Vice President Biden telling Hispanics that those who want to limit immigration are racist, or the constant claims by President Obama and Michelle that they want to win so people can succeed “no matter what you look like.”

There’s more, but I won’t list it all here. But know that Biden’s metaphor fits naturally into what is a clear strategy to make minorities afraid of Republicans. Whether planned or not, it emanates from the campaign playbook. It stinks.

Here’s the quote, from Biden earlier today in Danville, Virginia:

Romney wants to, he said in the first 100 days, he’s gonna let the big banks again write their own rules.”Unchain Wall Street!” They’re going to put you all back in chains.

And here’s the video:

Notice Biden has slipped into a black accent. So there’s one hint he’s talking to black people about Romney putting them back in chains.

What’s more, according to NBC, Danville is about 50 percent African American, and the audience reflected the area’s demography.

What’s with all these chameleons? Hillary, Biden, and Obama himself all start talking black when they appear in front of blacks.

The campaign gives Biden its seal of approval:

This came after a long duel in which Cutter tried not to specifically say that the Obama campaign condoned the actual words. Didn’t earn her paycheck today.

And one other thing. I’m beginning to have a lot of trouble imagining Biden as president. And it’s not linked to politics.

I can just see him in the middle of the night with nothing on but his slippers, and his finger on the nuclear button: “DONT MAKE ME DO IT! DON’T MAKE ME DO IT!”

And now for the musical entertainment portion of our post:

The Beatles did a good version too, but this one is better, in my opinion.

Biden Plays the Race Card in Vegas

Vice President Biden this week engaged in some of the most egregious race baiting of the campaign, charging that the policies of Mitt Romney and Republicans with respect to Latinos were the modern equivalent of xenophobic and discriminatory practices of the past.

The clear race baiting, largely ignored by the mainstream press, came during a speech Biden gave to the National Council of La Raza in Las Vegas.

Biden went so far as to suggest a parallel between the Republicans and the 19th-century Know Nothing Party, a sometimes violently anti-Catholic and anti-immigrant movement that flourished briefing in the 1850s:

Then as now, it wasn’t  just those seeking to come who got the brunt of this xenophobia, it was those who had been here for a long time, like my Irish Catholic family. The same kind of backlash – that kind of backlash – is not new in American history.”

Biden indicated that GOP-backed initiatives to counter illegal immigration and to enact voter identification laws were animated by a dislike for Latinos and fear of them because they are “different” and growing in numbers:

You, the Latino community, is the fastest-growing population in America. You now make up 16 percent of the population of the United States of America.

But there are voices among us who fear your inclusion.  But that’s not new in American history. There’s always been a fight between the voices of inclusion and the voices of exclusion. Between those pushing forward and those who continue to try to pull us back.

Between those appealing to our hopes, and those who continue to appeal to our fears. People fear what they don’t know. People fear that that is different to them.

Biden framed support for Obama’s immigration policies as a rejection of discrimination and intolerance against Hispanics, saying those who agreed with a recent Obama executive order allowing the children of illegal immigrants to remain in the country were responding to “the better angels of the American people.”

Biden lumped in what he termed “attempts at voter suppression” – the voter ID laws – with early education, Pell Grants and affordable health care as issues where Republican policies were menacing toward Hispanics.

Biden’s attempt to stoke racial fires comes even amid a boomlet of support for Obama from Hispanics in the wake of his executive order.

A Wall Street Journal poll released late last month found that the number of Hispanics with a “very positive” view of Obama leapt by ten percentage points to 41 percent, and that Obama now has a lead among Latinos over Mitt Romney of 66 percent to 26 percent.

Race Threatens to Become a Weapon in the Campaign

The 2008 campaign was remarkably free of racial talk, as the first serious black candidate for president sailed to victory in a largely colorblind campaign that emphasized his personal qualities and proposals.

Obama refrained from making his race an issue, and his opponents mostly left it alone too.

But events in the past week raise concern that race is being inserted into the 2012 campaign, particularly as a means to slander those who attack the president.

Left-leaning members of the mainstream media on numerous times in recent days have made race a part of the political equation, with many raising questions about whether conservatives are racially motivated in their treatment of President Obama.

The introduction of racial issues threatens to create a new and pernicious element of divisiveness that could create racial tensions during the campaign and induce a dangerous racial backlash after it, no matter who wins.

Following Daily Caller reporter Neil Munro’s interruption of President Obama last week in the Rose Garden, there were numerous suggestions in the media – including from veteran reporter Sam Donaldson – that Munro had been motivated by racism, without a shred of evidence indicating this might be the case.

On Friday night, HBO host Bill Maher said conservative journalist Matt Drudge was animated by racism. Drudge’s website, The Drudge Report, frequently links to articles critical of Obama.

On Sunday, a panel of mostly black reporters were asked by host Roland Martin whether black leaders were doing enough to defend Attorney General Eric Holder, an assumption that race should be a factor in whether to back an attorney general accused of numerous shortcomings and potentially illegal actions.

On Tuesday, in a remark that was hardly noticed – perhaps because such suggestions are now becoming commonplace – MSNBC host Christopher Matthews asked former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown whether House Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa’s treatment of Holder was “ethnic.”

Brown quickly said it was, prompting Matthews to comment that some Republican House members “talk down to the president and his friends.”

As the campaign heats up and attacks in general on Obama become more fierce, such talk of race is only likely to increase. And it could become a useful weapon in the hands of unscrupulous Obama defenders hoping to intimidate the president’s opponents with the threat of being branded as racist.

Obama himself has added an element of race to the campaign by dividing up supporters along ethnic lines, creating groups such as “African Americans for Obama” and “Latinos for Obama.”

If charges of racially motivated attacks on the president continue and Obama himself does not move to discredit the charges, he will be complicit in the injection of race into the campaign.

Race Surfaces at Today’s Carney Briefing

Racial issues made an unusual – fortunately – appearance in the White House briefing room today, with White House Press Secretary Jay Carney generally walking the perilous path with aplomb.

Chicago Tribune reporter Christi Parsons asked Carney if race had anything to do with Obama’s selection of Gary Locke, who is Chinese American, to be ambassador to China.

Let’s take a look with the White House Dossier Brain Scanner into Carney’s internal thought processes and see what’s there:

“Oh, shit.”

OK, that’s what I thought we’d find. This is one of those questions where the answer, obvious to any sentient being, is “Of course, it has plenty to do with it.” But in the Washington and in polite society answer is . . . well, let’s see what Carney said initially:

You know, it’s – there are a lot of very important ambassadorial posts around the globe, and this is top shelf, as you might say. So his background, his range of experiences, his – what he brings to this job make him ideally suited to fill it.

Yeah, well, Christi didn’t let him go with that one, so he finally summoned some courage and came up with this:

Secretary Locke spoke about how it matters to him, and it obviously matters to us that he brings that as part of who he is to the — to the — to the job.

So, let’s give him a few points for not saying that IT’S A COMPLETE COINCIDENCE  that Locke is Chinese and he’s being made ambassador to China.

A couple of questions later, April Ryan of American Urban Radio Networks – a black radio news chain – wanted to know,

“How often does the president talk to the commanders at AFRICOM?”

AFRICOM is our African military command. She continued:

Especially right now, AFRICOM is very important because administration sources are saying that if indeed there were to be some way to enforce a no-fly zone and to deal with military options, the U.S. Africa Command Center would be at the lead.

So with that, do you know anything of how the president’s communicating? How is he getting information from AFRICOM? And also, not only just with Libya, there are other issues with Cote d’Ivoire . . .  There are other issues within Africa. Is the president being apprised of what’s happening?

It seems to me the answer to the question of how often the president talks to the commanders at AFRICOM is likely, “From never all the way up to almost never.” I’m sure Obama basically deals with the Joint Chiefs. And it’s unlikely Carney, a generalist, would be apprised of this if Obama did happen to talk to the commander.

It also seems to me the subtext of the question was, “Obama cares about Africa and the black people there, right?”

April plays a important role in the White House press corps. She’s one of the few black reporters there, and with a largely black audience, she asks questions that wouldn’t occur to her white colleagues in a million years but that matter to the one eighth of Americans who are African American.

Carney to his credit didn’t try to pretend that Obama and his AFRICOM commander are special friends.

Obviously, there’s a chain of command. He doesn’t, as far as I know, have regular, scheduled contacts with different, you know, regional commanders. But beyond that, I’m not sure — I’d have to — I could find out for you.

Nice to see a lack of immediate recourse to political correctness at the White House.

Obama: Race a Key Part of Tea Party Opposition to Him

In a private dinner at the White House last year, President Obama told guests that his Tea Party opponents are racially motivated, according to a new book, Family of Freedom: Presidents and African Americans in the White House, by veteran U.S. News & World Report White House reporter Kenneth Walsh.

Here’s part of a an excerpt that appeared in the magazine.

Obama, in his most candid moments, acknowledged that race was still a problem. In May 2010, he told guests at a private White House dinner that race was probably a key component in the rising opposition to his presidency from conservatives, especially right-wing activists in the anti-incumbent “Tea Party” movement that was then surging across the country. Many middle-class and working-class whites felt aggrieved and resentful that the federal government was helping other groups, including bankers, automakers, irresponsible people who had defaulted on their mortgages, and the poor, but wasn’t helping them nearly enough, he said.

A guest suggested that when Tea Party activists said they wanted to “take back” their country, their real motivation was to stir up anger and anxiety at having a black president, and Obama didn’t dispute the idea. He agreed that there was a “subterranean agenda” in the anti-Obama movement—a racially biased one—that was unfortunate. But he sadly conceded that there was little he could do about it.

So much for the post-racial presidency.