The New Demands of Black Lives Matter

First published August 4, 2016 in Frontpage Magazine

Tenacious in distorting reality and inciting violence against police, the Black Lives Matter movement is at it again. Not satisfied with forcing colleges like Harvard, Yale and Princeton to remove “head master” from professors’ titles or change building names they deem racist, BLM recently issued policy demands.

The six demands include:

  1. End the war on black people.
  2. Reparations for past and continuing harms.
  3. Divestment from the institutions that criminalize, cage and harm black people; and investment in the education, health and safety of black people.
  4. Economic justice for all and a reconstruction of the economy to ensure our communities have collective ownership, not merely access.
  5. Community control of the laws, institutions and policies that most impact us.
  6. Independent black political power and black self-determination in all areas of society.

That’s an exhausting list of mostly nonsense. What’s strikingly absent from this list of racial grievances is any acceptance of personal responsibility from blacks. Instead they demand action from the government to fix generational problems of their own making.

BLM can start ending the “war on black people” by telling black people to stop having babies out of wedlock at a rate approaching 75%. This has lead to blacks, who represent a mere 13% of the population, committing over 50% of homicides from 1980-2008. According to the Justice Department over this 30-year period, blacks were six times more likely than whites to be homicide victims and seven times more likely than whites to commit homicides.

Promoting marriage among blacks, where two parents raise a child, would be a great way to prevent blacks from being incarcerated at a higher rate than whites, which addresses demand #3. When you’re not incarcerated, you can get a job, start your own business and achieve “economic justice” in demand #4. Curiously, blacks already hold local, state and federal offices as Democrats and therefore already “control laws, institutions and polices,” as BLM demand #5 states. The problem is that black Democrat elected officials in cities like Baltimore, DC, Philadelphia, and Chicago aren’t promulgating policies that help blacks.

“Most urban areas in the United States like Baltimore, where crime and unemployment rates are high, have been government by Democrats for decades. Baltimore hasn’t had a Republican mayor since Theodore Roosevelt McKeldin in 1967. During those decades of so many American cities being run into the ground by Democrats, blacks have become poorer, more violent, and further banished to ghettos thanks to their undying loyalty to the Democrat Party a the ballot box. In 2015 Baltimore’s mayor, city council president and prosecutor were all Democrats,” I observed in my book Con Job.

This brings us to BLM demand #6. If BLM wants blacks to have “independent political power in all aspects of society,” perhaps the group should start encouraging blacks to stop voting exclusively for the Democrat party. Demand #3 asks politicians to invest in education for blacks. Republicans support school choice programs like charter schools which disproportionately help blacks. Democrats oppose these programs.

In the wake of the shooting death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri by police officer Darren Wilson, the directionless Black Lives Matter movement was born.

It started with a hashtag on Twitter. Then the group moved to protests, forcing President Barack Obama and Democrat presidential candidates to acknowledge the movement as legitimate. Facts were always ignored. In March 2015, the Justice Department concluded in an 87-page report that “the facts do not support the filing of criminal charges against Officer Wilson.”

“Michael Brown’s death, though a tragedy, did not involve prosecutable conduct on the part of Officer Wilson,” US Attorney General Eric Holder explained.

Brown wasn’t a gentle giant but a giant thug, who stood six foot four and weighed over 200 pounds. He robbed a convenience store before confronting Wilson and reaching inside his police car to grab his gun. Since Brown’s death, there have been other isolated incidents of police officers shooting black men that the media obsessed over.

Freddie Gray was another. After Baltimore state’s attorney Marilyn Mosby filed charges against six officers involved in Gray’s death, none were found guilty. After a mistrial and three acquittals, in July 2016, Mosby dismissed charges against the other officers. This reveals how weak the cases were to begin with but it made good headlines at the time for liberals seeking to placate blacks.

In 2015, the Washington Post found that only 4% of blacks were victims of fatal shootings by police. Black men are profiled more than white men because they’re committing a disproportionate amount of crime. The DC Police Department’s twitter feed is rampant with suspect descriptions of B/M (Black male). And if wearing hoodies is a fashion statement, why are they the uniform of so many black criminals?

If black lives matter so much, perhaps black men should stop annihilating other blacks with guns. In 2015, black gangbangers shot Tyshawn Lee, a black nine year old, who was walking to his grandmother’s house. It’s not rhetoric to talk about the staggering amount of violence plaguing the black race that’s not perpetrated by racist cops. While Obama, Democrats and Black Lives Matter demand that police take responsibility for bad policing, where are the demands that blacks confront their own problems?

It’s all about power for the Clintons

First published August 1, 2016 in the Toronto Sun

Nothing Hillary Clinton has done since 1992 has been spontaneous.

When she accepted the Democratic party’s nomination for president, Hillary didn’t disappoint, or moreover, let down her facade.

Let’s put aside the historic moment of it all that Hillary is the first woman to earn a party’s presidential nomination. The liberal media has pounded that into our heads as the sole reason to vote for her.

But the victory photo of Hillary, a would-be president and standing next to her husband and former president Bill Clinton, really shows what last week’s convention result was all about — power.

For nearly 40 years, Hillary has been fighting for this moment — staying married to a serial philanderer in order to gain political power.

She reminded Americans in her speech that she’s a career politician with a long resume and no achievements — except getting rich off her public service.

“Now, sometimes the people at this podium are new to the national stage. As you know, I’m not one of those people. I’ve been your first lady. Served eight years as a senator from the great State of New York. Then I represented all of you as secretary of state,” she boasted.

Her acceptance speech — like her career — was as calculated and sterile as her career. There were no new details in the speech. Like a broken record, Hillary promised free college, paid family leave, and affordable child care.

“We’re going to pay for every single one of them. And here’s how: Wall Street, corporations, and the super-rich are going to start paying their fair share of taxes,” she said.

It’s funny that Hillary is promising to get tough on the Wall Street firms who paid her $250,000 for speeches and helped make her wealthy. Besides that point, you can’t tax the rich enough to pay for all this free stuff unless America becomes a socialist state verging of bankruptcy.

Chelsea Clinton, like Bill Clinton a few nights before her, humanized her mom and tried to make people like her — something that Hillary has not done a good job at.

Recounting what a great mother Hillary was to her, Chelsea said that Hillary “never, ever forgets who she’s fighting for.”

But that’s just it in a nutshell: Hillary and her husband have always been fighting for themselves.

From 2001-2013, Bill Clinton received $105 million for 542 speeches. He created the Clinton Foundation to enrich the Clintons and their friends and ultimately to serve as a super political action committee to help elect Hillary president.

Then, of course, there’s the rogue private email account she used as secretary of state to avoid public accountability and scrutiny of her job.

The Clintons seem to be uniquely privileged public servants. They engage in seemingly lawless behaviour, and unlike the rest of us, the Clintons are rewarded with historic nominations and presidencies — perhaps not once but maybe even twice.

Democrats playing race card – again

First published July 26, 2016 in the Toronto Sun

Democrats promised that their coronation, I mean convention nomination, of Hillary Clinton was going to be an uplifting affair.

Yet watching the first night of the Democrat National Convention felt like it was 1964 all over again. While Michelle Obama declared in her speech “when they aim low, we aim high,” Democrats pulled the entire deck of ugly race cards all night long.

Then like now, Democrats stoked racial division to win votes and political power in America over the last half century. The only difference was then there was a white Democrat president. In 2016, we have a black Democrat president.

Listening to Sen. Cory Booker yell that it was time for Americans “to rise up,” one wouldn’t think we had elected a black leader almost eight years ago.

The night’s theme was how racially divided America has become — curiously, under the first black president. Between the boos yelled by Bernie Sanders supporters, it felt like riots might erupt at any minute on the convention floor as Sen. Elizabeth Warren ranted that Donald Trump was campaigning to divide America based on race, religion and gender.

“But ask yourself this. When white workers in Ohio are pitted against black workers in North Carolina, or Latino workers in Florida, who really benefits?” Warren said.

Democrats benefit from identity politics, not Republicans. It’s the classic playbook that Barack Obama used. In 2008 and 2012, Obama played the race card and won with historic levels of black voter turnout. And he’s used race throughout his entire presidency as a political weapon.

So there’s no surprise that according to the Washington Post, more than 6 in 10 adults say race relations in the U.S. are bad. That’s 63% compared with 48% earlier this year. It’s probably not helpful when you have the first Black president of America praising black lives and blasting blue (police officer) and white lives.

But blacks who voted for Obama at rates approaching nearly 100% have been left with nothing but higher unemployment, crime and less prosperity than whites.

So, it was no surprise that Michelle Obama gave a fantastic speech Monday at the DNC in Philadelphia, stoking the rage of racial division that swept her husband into office.

“I wake up every morning in a house that was built by slaves. And I watch my daughters, two beautiful, intelligent, black young women, playing with their dogs on the White House lawn. And because of Hillary Clinton, my daughters — and all our sons and daughters — now take for granted that a woman can be president of the United States.”

Curiously, Michelle didn’t mention that while her black daughters were on the White House lawn playing, her husband was inside plotting ways to exploit race to win battles. He blamed his inability to negotiate and cut deals with a GOP Congress on his race and rushed to defend black men killed by cops before the facts were in.

In addition to making amends with Hillary in Philadelphia, Michelle should have praised her husband for being an example to her daughters and kids everywhere that blacks are truly equal. But talk of equality does drive Democrats to the polls today.

White president Lyndon B. Johnson and black president Obama are both Democrats who capitalized on race to win. And to borrow from Michelle’s words, “that is the kind of president that Hillary Clinton will be.”

Ted Cruz needs to learn politics is a team sport

First published July 21, 2016 in the Toronto Sun

Heel dog, heel!

That’s what I wanted to say to Sen. Ted Cruz when he sabotaged the Republican National Convention and turned it into an episode of the biggest loser. Instead of endorsing GOP nominee Donald J. Trump, which is what convention speakers are supposed to do, Cruz acted like a junkyard dog with rabies.

“To those listening, please don’t stay at home in November. Stand up and speak, and vote your conscience, vote for candidates up and down the ticket who you trust to defend our freedom,” Cruz, told the packed arena, then grinned when they booed him.

In other words, Cruz said, “Don’t vote for Trump.”

I predicted this in a piece I wrote earlier for the Toronto Sun. Even though Cruz’s grandstanding and arrogance stunned everyone in the moment, it wasn’t that unexpected. Cruz has never been a team player. In his tenure as a freshman senator, Cruz became known for saying no and making every battle in Congress about elevating his celebrity.

Cruz has accomplished nothing in the Senate but proving he’s a good reader of “Green Eggs and Ham.” He read the book in his infamous filibuster on the Senate floor in 2013, demanding Obamacare be defunded in the bill to keep the government running.

Hour 17 into Cruz’s 21-hour filibuster, he said “I would be perfectly happy if not a single story coming out of this ever mentioned my name.”

Boy, how Cruz can lie. In his shameless campaign speech Wednesday night, the Texas senator proved to everyone, particularly Republicans, that he is all about self-promotion. Thursday morning in Cleveland, Cruz doubled down on his childish behaviou at a breakfast for the Texas delegates.

“I am not in the habit of supporting people who attack my wife and attack my father. And that pledge was not a blanket commitment that if you go and slander and attack Heidi that I’m going to none the less come, like a servile puppy dog, and say thank you very much for maligning my wife.”

Yes the primary was a nasty, muddy fight. Politics isn’t pretty. But the convention was time for Cruz to help unite the party around its nominee or say nothing. “If you can’t say something nice then don’t say anything at all.”

At first I wondered why Trump would allow Cruz to turn the GOP convention into a spectacle. Cruz said that Trump didn’t ask for his endorsement in exchange for a speaking slot at the convention and that the campaign saw his speech and knew exactly what he was going to say. And that’s probably why Trump magnanimously allowed Cruz to speak so that he would make an ass of himself and hammer the nail in his own political coffin.

“This just isn’t a team sport. This is about principles and ideals. This is about standing for what we believe in,” Cruz lectured the Texas delegation the next morning.

But politics IS a team sport. It’s about rallying behind the nominee to prevent the U.S. Supreme Court from being packed with liberals, keeping America safe and making the country more prosperous again.

Classless Cruz proved unequivocally that the only thing he believes in is himself. After Cleveland, Cruz thinks he’s headed for another presidential run in 2020. I think he should be looking for a real job. He’s going to need one in 2018 when his Senate term is up.

Melania Trump speech snafu makes husband look sloppy

First published July 19, 2016 in the Toronto Sun News

Clearly, you need to have more than a pretty face when you’re giving a speech at the Republican National Convention and your husband happens to be the nominee.

Melania Trump was billed as the headliner speaker to kick off the convention in Cleveland on Monday. She did, but for the wrong reason.

From the moment she took the stage, radiant in a white dress, the crowd inside and outside the auditorium ogled at her beauty. But while Melania talked generically about her husband, GOP nominee Donald Trump, the liberal media sleuthed. Yes, the press found a portion of her speech, which seemed lifted, word for word, from Michelle Obama’s 2008 Democratic convention speech.

Melania said:

“My parents impressed on me the values that you work hard for what you want in life. That your word is your bond, and you do what you say and keep your promise. That you treat people with respect.”

Michelle said:

“Barack and I were raised with so many of the same values: That you work hard for what you want in life; that your word is your bond and you do what you say you’re going to do; that you treat people with dignity and respect, even if you don’t know them, and even if you don’t agree with them.”

In other words, parts of Melania’s speech appear plagiarized — by someone.

“I read once over it, and that’s all. Because I wrote it … with as little help as possible,” Melania explained in a Today interview Tuesday.

When your husband is the party’s presidential nominee, you should have as much help, including vetting of the remarks, as possible. Melania seemed uncomfortable in the spotlight and like she hadn’t rehearsed her speech enough. Perhaps more time should have been spent on what she said than what she wore.

But I blame Trump’s campaign for that and his staff’s doubling down on excuses are laughable.

Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort scoffed to CNN that the idea of her stealing another person’s words was crazy and “this is, once again, an example of when a woman threatens Hillary Clinton, how she seeks out to demean her and take her down. It’s not going to work.”

Then Manafort said this at a press conference:

“Somebody from CBS told me we’re talking about 50 words, and that includes ‘and and the’ … There was no word-by-word. There were another 1,400 words in that speech.”

This wasn’t the most ridiculous defence. Peeved Trump campaign spokesman Katrina Pierson told the Hill:

“These are values, Republican values by the way, of hard work, determination, family values, dedication, and respect and that’s Melania Trump. And this concept that Michelle Obama invented the English language is absurd.”

Pierson told the reporter to look at Laura Bush’s speech from 2004, “you’ll find something similar.”

Is there a CliffsNotes version of potential first lady speeches that candidates’ spouses crib from every election cycle?

This snafu boils down to more than an inconsequential “she said, she said.” It makes Donald Trump look sloppy, which is exactly what he accuses reckless Hillary Clinton of.

Granted a few plagiarized paragraphs doesn’t rise to the same level of negligence as using a private server and personal email account to send national security information, as Hillary did while secretary of state. But when your wife kicks off an already rocky convention full of chaos and party disunity, it doesn’t build confidence in your candidacy.

Rep. King and That Old White GOP 

Black people truly seem invisible to the Republican Party. In fact, sometimes we’re on the verge of being non-existent to the GOP.

After the shellacking the GOP got in 2012, I thought my party had learned a painful lesson—that myopically focusing on the white vote wasn’t the path to the White House.  I was wrong.

Watching the kick-off of the 2016 convention in Cleveland was like déjà vu all over again. The majority of the speakers were old white men and the crowd packing the convention center was overwhelmingly white. Of the 2,472 delegates, only 18 are black.

In an appearance on MSNBC, which was broadcasting from Cleveland, Representative Steve King suggested that the reason the convention was packed with so many white people was because they contributed more to America.

“This whole ‘old white people’ business does get a little tired, Charlie. I’d ask you to go back through history and figure out where are these contributions that have been made by these other categories of people that you are talking about? Where did any other subgroup of people contribute more to civilization?”

That was King in response to Esquire magazine writer Charles Pierce who observed that 2016  may be “the last time that old white people would command the Republican Party’s attention, its platform, its public face.”

Pierce added, that the convention hall was packed full of angry white people.  Instead of responding thoughtfully to Pierce’s observations, King doubled-down on the GOP white card, defending the party’s lack of inclusion.

His comments are offensive on are so many levels. Mainly the fact that without slaves, who were forcibly brought to America and sold as property, white men like Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and many others couldn’t have built this country. Because slaves were the free labor white men used to build the US Capitol, the White House, many state houses around the nation and more.

Aside from building America, blacks like Harriet Tubman, Frederick Douglas, Martin Luther King, Jr., and many other non-whites made significant contributions to our civilization.  Aside from King’s racially- tinged and ignorant comment, America’s changing demographics don’t favor Republican thinking like this. The country is getting browner, not whiter. By the year 2050, over 50% of the nation’s population will be non-white. Mitt Romney lost in 2012 because he miserably lost the black, Hispanic, Asian and woman vote to Obama.

Noting the absence of diversity in speakers at the convention, MSNBC host Chris Hayes asked Pierce:

“What does this say about the identity crisis the party has right now?”

Amid all the other controversies from the first day of the convention, the floor fight and Melania Trump’s allegedly plagiarized speech, it looks like the GOP is cracking up. And that we may be headed for a third loss in 2016.