Looking for real leadership

Barack Obama and Eric Holder have a unique opportunity. They are among the two most successful blacks in world history. Until recently, President Obama has avoided being identified too closely with black issues. Eric Holder embraced race from day one. Both now have a chance to be real leaders. Holder called for an honest discussion about race. Let’s have it. Let’s have one robust and truthful enough to offend everybody.

Let's first stipulate that most of the black community is doing well and is not involved in crime. The image of the black community is dragged down by a persistently difficult underclass. It is interesting that immigrant blacks from Africa or the Caribbean see this and try hard to protect their kids from being infected by their negative culture. Maybe this is why immigrant blacks from Africa have higher achievement levels than native born blacks.

Where does this culture come from? I think it is clearly influenced by racism, but it is not current racism. Parts of the community developed a negative outlook as a result of racism. Why try hard if you will not get ahead anyway? But this racism has largely been removed, as evidenced by the success of immigrant blacks. It is interesting that Obama, Holder, Colin Powell and many of the black achievers in general are from immigrant families.

So what do we do? Black leaders enjoyed great success fighting racism. They won this fight. Some, like Sharpton, want to keep on using the old tactics. But the method does not work against the persistent problems of culture and may make it worse. If we could make it impossible to tell the race of individuals, the black underclass would make no more progress than they do now, since their plight results from their own habits and behaviors.

Obama and Holder know what it takes for a black man to succeed in America. There is no doubt that they got some breaks from affirmative action programs, but they clearly worked hard and had good habits to get where they did. This is the message. You CAN make it in America. Blacks CAN make it in America. But much of it is up to them.

Non-black America (i.e. whites and Asians) certainly can help in general ways. One of my personal favorites is investment in community colleges. Community colleges help bridge the gap and acculturate people to success. Nothing will work immediately. It takes years to develop good habits and behaviors and they do not begin to pay off immediately. But the time to start is now.

Posted by Christine & John at December 22, 2014 10:50 AM
Comments
Comment #386863

You really aren’t going to be able to declare racism dead unilaterally. You talk about a persistent underclass being the problem. Actually, no, it isn’t. Not even close. Most people don’t steal, don’t assault or kill. It’s mostly a matter of three factors: concentration of population, drug and alcohol use, and poverty. And even there, only some people actually end up criminals.

Those criminals are focused on, pointed at by sanctimonious politicians as being the whole community’s problem, even as those same people ridicule the notion that society would be to blame when they ask for any kind of mercy.

Black drug users spend more time in prison for the same drugs, they are the victims of police violence more often.

People actually assume, according to studies, that black people have greater strength and greater ability to absorb physical assault than white people. Many other unfair assumptions are made, assumptions that make it easier for some to assume that it’s necessary to use greater violence against them than otherwise.

The must be applied equally, if we truly value constitutional principles, and are not truly racists. We can complain that we personally are not racially biased, but thoughts are both the weakest demonstration of that lack of bias to others, and prone to being contradicted by our actions. Racism isn’t just hatred, it’s a tendency to treat people differently based on appearance.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at December 22, 2014 1:29 PM
Comment #386865

Bah, Humbug Mr. Daugherty.

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 22, 2014 1:47 PM
Comment #386867

Stephen

MOST people do not steal or live off welfare all the time. But SOME people do this persistently. When you look at the problem offenders, you find that they have long records and persistent failure. That guy who killed those two cops is a good example.

Re them being the whole community’s problem - I thought that is what liberals thought. Don’t you believe in helping those who have problems instead of just blaming them?

Mercy is a great thing. Helping people not need mercy is better.

Re drug users - we should probably reduce penalty for all drugs.

We should apply all laws and rules equally. I have always advocated that, as do most conservatives.

Now, let’s get real. It is clear that the problem is not with MOST black people. Statistics show that immigrant blacks do better than native blacks. This shows the problem is more likely cultural and behavioral, else Africans would have as much or more trouble.

Posted by: C&J at December 22, 2014 2:25 PM
Comment #386868

C/J, don’t confuse Daugherty with logic.

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 22, 2014 2:31 PM
Comment #386871

NYC: “What do we want? Dead Cops.” When do we want it? Now.”

Protesters in NY shouting the slogan above have been rewarded with two dead policemen for no reason other than a riot mentality. Those shouting those slogans are complicit in those deaths.

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 22, 2014 3:18 PM
Comment #386874

Sorry C&J, but this Presidents words and actions all point to one thing: He is more concerned with leading an agenda, than he is with leading a nation.

Posted by: kctim at December 22, 2014 4:06 PM
Comment #386875

kctim

I can hope even if my experience tells me you are probably right.

Royal

I don’t know if we can blame those clowns but at least we can say they should feel remorse for their stupidity. I doubt they do, however.

Posted by: C&J at December 22, 2014 4:21 PM
Comment #386876

C/J wrote; “I don’t know if we can blame those clowns…”

I see no difference between them and a lynch mob. The perp(s) as well as the inciters are guilty of causing death by other than legal means.

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 22, 2014 4:29 PM
Comment #386877

Fox Affiliate 45 in Baltimore faked the “kill the cop” chant through creative editing. They have apologized.

http://foxbaltimore.com/news/features/top-stories/stories/fox45-apologizes-error-newscast-34622.shtml#.VJjDd14AO

Posted by: phx8 at December 22, 2014 10:22 PM
Comment #386879

Phx8

That was not the chant they were playing on most channels, which was more clearly about dead cops. Listen to what you think it sounds like. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dj4ARsxrZh8

Posted by: C&J at December 22, 2014 11:09 PM
Comment #386881

Nice try at deflection, phx8, but we ain’t buying it.

Posted by: tdobson at December 23, 2014 6:12 AM
Comment #386883

The discussions taking place are about the symptoms and not the disease. Ask the question, when did the alleged racial crimes take place, when did the GJ findings come out, and when did the liberal politicians begin to support the protesters? There can be no doubt, the event in Ferguson and NYC took place before the elections. But, as the elections drew near and the Democrats began to understand the losses they would suffer, the rhetoric began to be spread among the black community. After the elections, and the results of the grand juries were released; the rhetoric became full blown distortions and lies, condemning the police departments. This is not by chance, or an accident; these protests, which have led to destruction of personal property, burnings, thefts, and even the murder of policemen, have been purposely encouraged. The left leadership has done it solely because of the Democrat losses in the lest election. Remember, “never waste a crisis”. Obama, Holder, and Sharpton (just to name the top three), have purposely planned these events. The problem is, when the left leadership encouraged these protests, the protests take on a life of their own. In other words mob rule; the KKK of the old south (who was organized and supported by the Democratic Party) was an earlier version of leftist mob rule. No one can control the mob; and the evil police rhetoric only exasperates the problem by neutering the police departments. This is all because of the left’s sour grapes at losing the elections so badly. This isn’t the first time in history that the Democrats have done the exact same thing; and the result has always been the same. They lose more seats in government. These events, and the support of the left for civil disobedience will seal the fate of Hillary Clinton or any other Democrat who runs for President. Here is an interesting historical article from the Washington Examiner:

It’s been a bad couple of weeks for the liberals’ narrative outlook on life. One after another of their favorite genres has blown up in their faces as they have been caught telling and promoting stories that were too good to be true.

There was the gender-based theme, as the Rolling Stone tale of the horrendous gang rape at the University of Virginia went the way of the Duke lacrosse story — an elaborate hoax put on by the self-styled victim with no connection whatever to fact. A feminist student complained that “to let fact-checking define the narrative” would be a “mistake.” But a narrative without facts is simply a fiction and a lie that does damage to innocent people.

Damage to innocents is seldom a problem for the drivers of narratives, but it is for the people they hope to win over. This is a loss for the sisters in their war on the war against women, coming on top of the midterm elections. We can call this strike one.

There was no fact-checking around Ferguson, Mo., in August, because the story itself was so good. A 300-pound thief who picked a fight with a cop was turned into a “child” who was cruelly gunned down by a Bull Connor cutout. The incident became the excuse to loot and burn buildings, and then the excuse for the underemployed in large urban centers to lie down in crosswalks and block major arteries.

Six academics set upon two cops on the Brooklyn Bridge on Dec. 13 and broke the nose of one officer, as Columbia University graduate student Cindy Gorn and Rutgers-educated Spanish instructor Zachary Campbell tried to prevent the arrest of one Eric Linsker, a Baruch College professor and poet who was trying to drop a 50-pound garbage can on the officers’ heads. Isn’t it nice when intellectuals take an interest in local community matters? They have so much to contribute, what with their perspective and all.

Alas, this narrative of a racist police force suppressing “the other” exploded for good on Dec. 20, when two officers, Hispanic and Asian, were shot in their patrol car, mourned by the police and most of the city, and memorialized in a press conference translated in Spanish and attended by people of varying colors whose demeanor was a lot more refined than that of the protest community. The narrative may now never recover, mourn the liberal bloggers, varied race hustlers and many people at NBC News.

This has happened before. In the late 1960s, the last time students and faculty were this full of themselves, they succeeded in electing a lot of Republicans. They gave their own bete noir, Richard M. Nixon, his long deferred and soon squandered wish to be president. As Michael Barone writes in his book Our Country, “Some cheered the springtime rebels as demonstrations broke out in April and May 1969 at Harvard, the City College of New York, and San Francisco State College. Others cheered San Francisco State’s president, the beret-capped semanticist S.I. Hayakawa, as he climbed on the top of a student sound truck and pulled the plugs.”

Steven F. Hayward quotes Diana Trilling expressing dismay at the boost the riots gave then-Gov. Ronald Reagan, whose approval ratings in 1969 would nearly reach 80 percent. “Every time he shakes his finger at one of those mobs,” a supporter told Newsweek, “it gets him 10,000 votes.” The next year, voters would re-elect him by a nice, healthy margin — and would elect Republicans as president for 20 of the next 24 years.

Stephen Daugherty said:

You really aren’t going to be able to declare racism dead unilaterally. You talk about a persistent underclass being the problem. Actually, no, it isn’t. Not even close. Most people don’t steal, don’t assault or kill. It’s mostly a matter of three factors: concentration of population, drug and alcohol use, and poverty. And even there, only some people actually end up criminals.

Daugherty is wrong about his comments concerning the death of racism. Whatever racism is left in America is found in the great generation or baby boomers. I’m not saying there are race problems in those groups; I’m just saying, if there are problems, this is where it would be. The great generation is dying out every day and the ones who are still alive are no threat to any race. The baby boomers are facing retirement, separated from the work force and everyday interaction with anyone outside of their own families and friends. This leaves the millennials and gen x’s; the very generations who have been brought up in non-segregated life styles. These are the same groups of people the left claims has no problem with gay marriage and the same group the left claims is in their courts. The truth is, Obama, Holder, and Sharpton have created race problems. The most recent polls show that race problems are worse now than before Obama took office. In fact, all we have heard from Obama, Holder, and Sharpton is race fro the past 6 years. Obama ran on the ticket that he would be a uniter and not a divider, but he has been the opposite.

Daugherty is wrong again about crime; the crime rate in minority communities is much higher than in other parts of the country. The drug and alcohol miss-use is greater and Daugherty is correct that these problems are concentrated in population centers. The reason they are concentrated is because Democrats, for decades, have created low income housing projects, or ghettos where the black community has concentrated. Rather than assimilate into the general population; blacks have been forced to live in projects. These projects are always found in Democrat controlled areas. The Democrats keep these people in a perpetual state of dependency on the Democrat handouts. These areas have high unemployment. The Democrats have destroyed the education systems (no matter how much money is thrown at them), by pulling the teeth of the teachers and administrators and not allowing them to have control over the students. As a result, teen boys ram the streets and join gangs, and teen girls turn to pregnancy and children out of wedlock as a means of income. Many studies have been done over the years showing young grandmothers, younger mothers, and children living in projects (without fathers) on welfare checks and food stamps.

It is for this reason that C&J are correct. Immigrant blacks and other minorities do much better than established blacks; simply because they enter America with the goals of succeeding. Success and finding the American dream is not found in a welfare check or food stamps. The problem Democrats will have with amnesty for Hispanics is that Hispanics are industrious people and want to work and want to succeed. So as usual, the left is on the wrong side of history.

Posted by: Sam Jones at December 23, 2014 10:19 AM
Comment #386884
Immigrant blacks and other minorities do much better than established blacks; simply because they enter America with the goals of succeeding.

Is it that simple Sam? What you are saying is those blacks who descended from slaves, who,for generations, weren’t allowed to learn to read or write, who couldn’t buy land, were the poorest of the poor, whose skills were laborer and at the bottom of the wage scale, whose family members could be sold off, don’t do as well as those from other countries.

Posted by: j2t2 at December 23, 2014 10:51 AM
Comment #386886

The problem for Republicans is that they equate racism with Jim Crow, with the mainstream presence of organizations like the Ku Klux Klan. If that’s racism, if official discrimination in legal terms is racism, then yes, it’s gone.

Funny thing is, and as an autistic person who often relies on the rules to guide his behavior I run into this a lot, there’s the written and spoken rules, and then there are the unspoken rules.

The naïve thought that the Republicans have is, “If I do away with all these active anti-discriminatory measures, everybody will simply rise to the level of their ability, or sink to the depths of their vices.”

Believe me, that’s what I would love to believe actually occurs. It’s not the reality I observe. People who can buy the services of better lawyers get lighter sentences. People who are born to money are better able to attain an education, and those not born to it, like me, end up having to take on crushing debtloads- God help them if their chosen profession doesn’t pay enough.

And guess what? People still preferentially hire whites. Cops still preferentially inflict violence on black suspects over whites. We could say that’s not racism, but what exactly is the distinction that leads you to believe that a black person in your convenience store or department store is more likely to steal something?

What is it that almost guarantees that if you see a lower-income black person that they’re going to be either a gangbanger, or some kind of buffoon? What about the guy who works as a mechanic or drives a bus? It’s not an accident that sports and music are often seen as the main ways out of the ghetto in pop culture- these play to old stereotypes about what kind of work black people could do well.

What’s worse is that these stereotypes get fed back into people’s expectations of themselves. This in fact starts even before children are conscious of it. A study found that in places where the racial majority tilted a certain way, not only did children of the majority think of the minorities as inferior, but the minorities themselves adopted that view.

That’s not the end of things, but adults have to dampen this natural tendency, to reject those who are different. When they amplify it, they inculcate the very prejudices they would say they don’t have. Well, they’ll say they don’t have them, because to them it’s not a prejudice, it’s an assumed truth, which they will say they defy political correctness to speak out on.

Sam Jones seems to think that all these rabble rousers helped create a race problem here.

No, I think you have a race problem. Obama simply says that a man shouldn’t be arrested for breaking into his own house, that this is foolish.

You tell me: if you had to jimmy your way into your own house, wouldn’t you think it was a crock of **** to get arrested for it? It’s your property, the police can verify this.

But Obama gets accused of playing the race card for saying this, insulting the police.

How many times have I heard the old welfare canards? How many times have I seen them accuse Obama of having graduated in the top ten percent of his class based on affirmative action. What other Harvard Law Graduate, especially one with his record, can you remember being asked to provide his school records, without any positive source of controversy on the question? No white man would be asked to verify his education. None I can remember has been, absent some evidence of cheating. Never mind that a Tier One Law School accepted him as a teacher.

He has to fight this image that he’s somehow the second coming of Huey Newton, despite the fact that he’s one of the calmest Presidents we’ve had for a long time, “No Drama Obama.”

And this whole Kenya thing! He’s got verifiable evidence he was born here, yet even now a significant fraction of Republicans believe he’s foreign born. Even when they don’t, they do their best to imply that he’s a terrorist sympathizer or a secret Muslim because of his name. That, or they’ll take the name he once had and emphasize that to make him seem foreign that way, “Barry Soetoro.”

Doesn’t exactly seem like the Republican Party is celebrating diversity, or judging Obama by the merits. No, they do their best to diminish him by portaying him as other, do their best to diminish him by taking the name he purposefully decided to call himself as an adult, and instead call him the name he had as a child.

“Boy,” right? What many a southern white person once said to black men to put them in their place.

I’m not saying everybody in the GOP is as red-hot bigoted as that, but you folks should take a good look at what exactly you’re saying, and consider that in the name of politics, you might be encouraging and amplifying something that you should have let lie.

Oh, by the way, immigrants in general tend to work harder and progress faster. It’s not because somehow they’re better than the people we got at home. It’s because they don’t take for granted their position, for one thing. For another? They haven’t been here long enough to be discouraged by what came before.

One last thing: I am often told what I believe in. The stories about what my principles are supposed to be… here’s what it sounds like: it sounds like the propagandists on your side need people like me to be the villains. So you’re told, “they’re for laziness, for taking way what people have earned through hard work, for destroying the underlying fabric of society.”

Hell, you’re even told we’re in a war against Christmas. Christmas, for crying out loud.

People tell you these things because it gives extra purpose to being partisan. Who could not be against those who are against a functioning economy, against egalitarianism, against Christmas?

Of course, then you end up ignoring the persistent problems within your own party. You give passes to people who essentially made the last Congress one of the least productive of modern American history.

We’re not all that different in the final analysis. No Democrat sets out to vote themselves out of a job. Why would they? No Democrat wants to give up their tax dollars without getting something in return for it, some benefit to themselves or society. Why would they? And for Crying out loud, the guy who’s saying Happy Holidays does not mean “f*** Christmas” when they say it!

The Republicans of today need more than just their fear, they need their common sense. They’ve been led to believe some rather peculiar things about their fellow Americans, and it only serves the interest of a few lazy, small-minded good-for-nothings in their party that they’ve been set so viciously against their fellow American.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at December 23, 2014 11:16 AM
Comment #386887

SD, did you learn that pap from Baylor? I didn’t think they taught that type of stuff.
Or did you learn that from general experience from living in a liberal society
Or did that Christmas rant come from your mayor.
You seem to have no understanding about Americanism and the Constitution nor of what you interpret as common sense.
Just more from the Board of Essays of SD.

Posted by: tom humes at December 23, 2014 12:20 PM
Comment #386888

When politicians declare war on some social malady hold on to your pocketbook.

War on Poverty:

“In his January 1964 State of the Union address, President Lyndon Johnson proclaimed, “This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America.” In the 50 years since that time, U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs. Adjusted for inflation, this spending (which does not include Social Security or Medicare) is three times the cost of all U.S. military wars since the American Revolution. Yet progress against poverty, as measured by the U.S. Census Bureau, has been minimal, and in terms of President Johnson’s main goal of reducing the “causes” rather than the mere “consequences” of poverty, the War on Poverty has failed completely. In fact, a significant portion of the population is now less capable of self-sufficiency than it was when the War on Poverty began.”

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2014/09/the-war-on-poverty-after-50-years

War on drugs:

Have U.S. drug laws reduced drug use? No. The U.S. is the No. 1 nation in the world in illegal drug use. As with Prohibition, banning alcohol didn’t stop people drinking — it just stopped people obeying the law.

Here we are, four decades after Richard Nixon declared the war on drugs in 1971 and $1 trillion spent since then. What do we have to show for it?

War on Illiteracy:

Studies that have found that as many as one-third of the adults in the country are essentially illiterate, unable to read things like instructions on a bottle of medicine. Prof. Jeanne Chall of Harvard University recently estimated that as many as 75 million to 85 million of 180 million adult Americans are unable to read or write.

“There are many good reasons why declaring war on a social problem or launching a Marshall Plan to help a country or region are such attractive metaphors for politicians. Wars unite countries and stifle internal dissent. Wag the Dog is not just the title of a movie in which a war is manufactured to rally support for a government, but also an age-old political tactic. The war metaphor is also attractive because real wars — those between nation-states as opposed to those against concepts or bad socioeconomic trends — are finite. University of Notre Dame scholar Daniel Lindley has found that the average length of a war is 308 days when the country that starts it wins and 660 days when initiators lose. No surprise, then, that the war metaphor keeps getting deployed: It boosts expectations that in a few years a major scourge — cancer, terrorism, poverty — will be eliminated. “War” also holds the seductive promise of an open checkbook for the politicians who so liberally apply the term; after all, budgetary constraints tend to disappear during war along with all those pesky rules. Wars are for heroes, not for accountants who limit the resources needed for victory.”

http://circle.org/jsource/mixed-metaphors-wars-cancer-poverty-drugs-terror-drunk-driving-teen-pregnancy-ills-cant-won/

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 23, 2014 2:03 PM
Comment #386889
Is it that simple Sam? What you are saying is those blacks who descended from slaves, who,for generations, weren’t allowed to learn to read or write, who couldn’t buy land, were the poorest of the poor, whose skills were laborer and at the bottom of the wage scale, whose family members could be sold off, don’t do as well as those from other countries.

j2t2, you need to do a little better than talk about problems the blacks had from 60 to 160 years ago. To listen to you, you would think that blacks are still in the back of the bus. Yes, it’s that simple. As a millennial, I have to say that race was not a problem when I attended school or college. If some of the others on WB would tell the truth, they would say the same thing. Was race a major issue in the life of Stephen Daugherty? He grew up in the south, went to college in the south, and is a millennial. Did he grow up as a racist, or was his friends racists? I would say no. The left has been crying for more money for education in the ghettos for the past 60 years. Are you saying, after all that money was spent, that we still have blacks who can’t read or write? Who’s fault is that? The problem with the left, is they can ever take personal responsibility. When has Obama ever taken responsibility for anything he has screwed up? When has Daugherty or any on the left taken responsibility for Obama’s screw-ups? NEVER!!!

Regarding Daugherty’s comments; first I don’t give a crap about your personal life, problems, or health. You constantly bring up your autistic problems…I don’t care; and I imagine many others don’t care. You try to somehow identify yourself with the problems of blacks because of your personal problems. This is a joke, you are a white, Irish, catholic and you have nothing in common with any minorities.

You make this silly statement, “I’m not saying everybody in the GOP is as red-hot bigoted…”. Yes you are. How many times do you use the term “YOU”, “Your” and “YOU GUYS”. You try to sound like you are an intellect who is above the fray. I don’t think so; you are saying exactly what you mean to say. And, you know nothing g about me or for that matter most of the people on WB. You have no idea what our beliefs are. When I speak about the left, I say leftist, socialists, progressives; but I don’t say “you”. Do you believe the same thing as Sharpton, do you believe the same things as the Rev. Wright, do you agree 100% with Pelosi or Reid? If you don’t, then why do you use the term “YOU GUYS” to tell us what we believe?

The problem for Republicans is that they equate racism with Jim Crow, with the mainstream presence of organizations like the Ku Klux Klan. If that’s racism, if official discrimination in legal terms is racism, then yes, it’s gone.

Not true Daugherty; I guarantee that “Jim Crow” and the “KKK” is brought up more often by the left than it is the right. If that’s not racism, then why does the left bring it up all the time?

Here are Sharpton’s words from Aug. 2013:

Civil rights leader and MSNBC host Al Sharpton spoke at Wednesday’s event commemorating the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.‘s famous speech. Sharpton used the opportunity to address what he deemed as modern-day Jim Crow laws, including Stand Your Ground and stop-and-frisk. Sharpton declared that this new generation of Americans needs to carry on the mantle of Dr. King by fighting back against “James Crow Junior, Esquire.”

Or from April, 2010:

Sharpton, other activists compare Arizona immigration law to apartheid, Nazi Germany and Jim Crow

Or perhaps Eric Holders beliefs:

Jim Crow is popular in the current U.S. Department of Justice, too. Attorney General Eric Holder frequently bashes voter identification laws as examples of Jim Crow. Apparently the nation’s highest legal officer cannot distinguish between requiring a photo ID to confirm an individual’s identity and requiring an individual to prove they are descended from people with the “right” skin color.

The KKK and Jim Crow were created by the Democratic Party, and yet it is your side who constantly brings them up.

Obama and Kenya or his Harvard education is another thing brought up by the left. The “government shutdown” or “impeaching Obama” is another thing brought up and promoted by the left. Daugherty, you’re talking about things that come from the left and not from Conservatives. I have no idea where he was born and frankly don’t care, I have no idea about his education…I have never seen his grade transcripts, so I don’t really know how smart he is, and neither do you?

The rest of your rant is gibberish and has nothing to do with the conversation. Why don’t you try answering questions that were brought up…Oh, I forgot, you did say that you are not willing to answer any questions about Obama or his administration, even if you object to what he is doing, because you don’t want to give the right ammunition that could be used against you. So again I ask, why are you even on WB?

Posted by: Sam Jones at December 23, 2014 2:28 PM
Comment #386893

San Jones
Here is one reason he is on WB. He likes to run the show. He likes to show how brilliant his light bulb shines. In reality he shows off his chocolate cover shoes. There is a light that is dim but has some possibility and that is he is not yet 40 years young. He is still evolving from a liberal/progressive to a constitutionalist. I am over the hill and don’t have time to see that progress. So when I get to heaven maybe somebody will inform me of whether SD got to the non-smoking section or he went all out for the smoking section. Frankly I won’t care where he ended up after my progression to my mansion with my Lord.

Posted by: tom humes at December 23, 2014 4:29 PM
Comment #386894

Sam and Tom, over the years I have come to believe that Mr. Daugherty likes to sit on his “pity-pot”. Unless government is growing larger and spending more he is disappointed. He is not a very good new idea liberal…just a knee-jerk, go-along kind of non-thinker.

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 23, 2014 5:16 PM
Comment #386895

I think SD calls himself a progressive. In my opinion, there isn’t much difference between a progressive and a Marxist.

Posted by: tdobson at December 23, 2014 5:28 PM
Comment #386896

I wonder if Mr. Daugherty or some other liberal could possibly understand what it must feel like to be a policeman in a large city, going to work every day protecting the public and knowing that many of those very citizen hate them and might just try to murder them?

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 23, 2014 6:45 PM
Comment #386897

Royal Flush,
If citizens hate and fear the police, the problem is not with the citizenry. As a devotee of the Constitution, surely you would agree the police are not above the law; that if they kill an unarmed citizen while making an arrest, there should at the very least be a trial. Perhaps the policemen will be found ‘not guilty.’ But at a minimum, there must be an opportunity for every citizen to find justice. The great failure here isn’t even with the police, or unarmed people resisting arrest; it is with the local DA’s who fail to bring charges and make justice available to every citizen, especially when the issue involves the loss of life.

tdobson,
Looks like the progressives and the Marxists have created an economy growing at a 5% clip for GDP, the best in over a decade. The progressives and the Marxists have created the conditions for a stock market that has seen one of the fastest 1000 point rises on the Dow in stock market history, and thanks to progressives and Marxists, the DJIA topped 18,000 today, an all time high. The progressives and the Marxists have created conditions for low interest rates, no inflation, a recovered housing market, a booming employment sector, health care reform that was not “job killing” after all.

Of course, if you put all your money in gold, or bought a lot of ammo when Obama was re-elected in 2012, then life probably sucks…

Time to become a progressive and a Marxist.

Posted by: phx8 at December 23, 2014 8:32 PM
Comment #386898

phx8
I think the increase in the economy is the result of anticipation of Republicans winning the election.

Ammo has been and is a good investment

Marxism has failed every time it has been tried. I don’t want to try it again.

Posted by: tdobson at December 23, 2014 8:44 PM
Comment #386899

A simple set of questions

If you had a really smart black kid in HS, good grades, clean record, would this kid have a greater or lesser chance of getting into a good school than a white or Asian kid with identical grades?

Same kid goes to a four year college where he gets good grades, stays out of trouble and graduates with a degree in a good subject (i.e. not something like African studies). Does this kid have a greater or lesser chance of getting a good job or into a good grad school than the white kid with an identical record. who sits next to him.

Say he decides to get an MBA. Imagine a black MBA from a good school. Would not major firms be falling over themselves to hire this guy?

We all know the answers. C works in HR. They work hard to recruit qualified blacks. The problem is that qualified blacks are too much in demand. They often demand higher salaries.

Posted by: C&J at December 23, 2014 8:47 PM
Comment #386902

“I think the increase in the economy is the result of anticipation of Republicans winning the election.”

That’s pretty funny. But not ha-ha funny.

It does raise an interesting question. Can anyone name anything positive the Republicans intend to do in the next two years? You know, positive. Positive, as in actually doing something-

As opposed to repealing, reducing, banning, rolling back, shrinking, abolishing, doing away with, bombing, cutting, or overturning-

“Ammo has been and is a good investment.”

That’s even funnier. Imagine someone setting themselves up as a financial planner and advising clients to purchase ammo! “Yes, yes, buy all you can, it is a good investment! Um, no, it doesn’t actually provide any kind of financial return- in fact, it is a non-producing asset with a virtual certainty of no possible return-on-investment, unless a life of crime is in the works, or a zombie apocalypse is imminent.’

Hint: WC Fields used to say you never give one of these an even break…

“Marxism has failed every time it has been tried.”
I’m not sure it was ever really tried. It was an economic philosophy, and while very interesting in some ways, it was not very practical. The communist systems of the Soviet Union and China paid lip service to Marxism, but really, they were totalitarian states. And totalitarian states worked very well for decades, rapidly bringing backwards societies consisting mostly of peasants- not proletarians- into the 20th century, to become some of the most powerful nations in the world. It was brutal and heartless and it denied basic freedoms and liberties to people- but it worked.

The ultimate failure of the totalitarian states was their inability to adapt to technological change. They could steal the technology for weaponry, but could not live with the unrestricted flow of information.


Posted by: phx8 at December 24, 2014 12:25 AM
Comment #386903

Phx8

Re Marxism - “I’m not sure it was ever really tried.” No ideology has ever been tried in anything like a pure form. Pure forms exist only in the minds of academics and no two of them can agree on what it means.

We have to look to what the “worldly” form looks like. In the world, Marxism degenerates into a deadly mix of intolerance, mass murder and economic stagnation. It is probably not possible to impose Marxism w/o creating a totalitarian state. Marx even envisions such a thing and it is violent and nasty.

We may be able to respect democratic socialism, although that is hard to find outside small and homogenous places and even there not very long. But Marxism is a cancer incompatible with freedom and human dignity.

Posted by: C&J at December 24, 2014 1:00 AM
Comment #386904

phx8
You are talking about paper profits. Can you deposit a stock certificate or a bond certificate in your local bank in a passbook account?

My bank will negotiate my precious metal for a passbook account. I prefer to just keep it under my mattress or in a jar buried in the ground. Isn’t that what you guess I would do being the seudo fool that I am? I buy precious metal once a month. I have sustained no losses in the process. I do not need to open a $5000 account at my local brokerage. I just purchase the product without a middle man.

Of course I do not have an MBA like you do. So maybe Obama will spread some of that around like he does with the other people he keeps on the dole. Does that put you into the class with those other Marxists on Wall St.? Just trying to guess what way you turn. I know it is to the left, but three left turns still makes it a right. So you gotta quit playing those progressive, leftists, marxist games and continue to join the all american constitutionalist group and stop using your yoyo to guess what the financial climate is going to be.

Merry Christmas

Posted by: tom humes at December 24, 2014 1:02 AM
Comment #386906

“It does raise an interesting question. Can anyone name anything positive the Republicans intend to do in the next two years? You know, positive. Positive, as in actually doing something-

As opposed to repealing, reducing, banning, rolling back, shrinking, abolishing, doing away with, bombing, cutting, or overturning” Before you can build a house, you have to clear the land and remove any garbage on the lot.

As far as ammo not being an investment, I could sell most of my ammo now for at least twice what I paid for it. That makes it a good investment for me, although it’s worth more than that to me. (who knew lead would be a precious metal)

Marxism has been tried several times with various tweaks throughout history and always failed. Why you want to re-invent a square wheel, I don’t know.


Posted by: tdobson at December 24, 2014 5:31 AM
Comment #386911

I knew a man who bought guns many years ago as an investment for his children’s college. Ammo and guns are always a good investment. And Obama has done wonders for guns and ammo. Nothing like a gun grabbing politician to increase the portfolio of a conservative.

If citizens hate and fear the police, the problem is not with the citizenry. As a devotee of the Constitution, surely you would agree the police are not above the law; that if they kill an unarmed citizen while making an arrest, there should at the very least be a trial. Perhaps the policemen will be found ‘not guilty.’ But at a minimum, there must be an opportunity for every citizen to find justice. The great failure here isn’t even with the police, or unarmed people resisting arrest; it is with the local DA’s who fail to bring charges and make justice available to every citizen, especially when the issue involves the loss of life.

This has to be one of the most ignorant statements ever made; invoking the Constitution and violating the Constitution in the same paragraph. It is up to the
DA to determine if a murder ha been committed; or he can send it to a GJ to determine if a trial is needed. But to invoke the Constitution and then say the police have no Constitutional rights is ignorant. There is a law in California (of all liberal bastions) that states, if someone is breaking into your house, armed or not, the owner has the right to shoot the intruder. Most states have the same laws, known as “stand your ground laws”.

DA’s are elected, and DA’s are to obey the laws on the books. If a DA is not obeying the law, charges can be brought against him; if the citizens do not like the laws, they can vote to change them. But the left wants to indiscriminately pick which laws they want to obey and which they don’t. Of course they get this from their messiah, Obama. He has been doing the same thing for 6 years.

Posted by: Sam Jones at December 24, 2014 12:17 PM
Comment #386912

The great failure, is for the perpetrators to not obey the police. The great failure is for people to not take responsibility for their own actions. For the past 50 years this mentality has invaded and been taught to todays generation. It’s called “situation ethics “:a system of ethics by which acts are judged within their contexts instead of by categorical principles —called also situational ethics”.

A lack of core principles or boundaries. So todays youth and particularly black youth have been taught to not take responsibility for their own actions.

I linked to a 16 year old black youth, in a previous post, who was at a Mall and had arrived too late to get in line for a sale on shoes. His dad said he had the money to buy the shoes, but after not being able to buy them, he pulled a gun on a man who had waited in line and bought the same shoes. The result was, the man had a CCW, pulled his own gun and shot the teenager. Why…because the teen felt (in his circumstances), that it was perfectly correct to steal from another person. Situation ethics; it is correct to do whatever you want, based upon the situation you are in. The blacks in Ferguson felt it was perfectly correct to steal and burn businesses while protesting, considering their situation.

Posted by: Sam Jones at December 24, 2014 12:34 PM
Comment #386915

td wrote; “Before you can build a house, you have to clear the land and remove any garbage on the lot.”

Great answer.

Merry Christmas to all.

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 24, 2014 3:30 PM
Comment #386917

Excellent summary and example Sam.

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 24, 2014 3:39 PM
Post a comment