Black History Museum Discriminates Against Clarence Thomas

First published October 10, 2016 in Frontpage Magazine

America’s new black history museum apparently likes to discriminate against black conservatives. There is no exhibit in the museum dedicated to Clarence Thomas, America’s second black Supreme Court Justice and first Republican black justice.

“The National Museum of African American History and Culture is the only national museum devoted exclusively to the documentation of African American life, history, and culture,” notes the website.

The irony of a museum devoted to chronicling the abuses against blacks — from slavery to segregation — excluding one of their own is a deplorable attempt to rewrite history. It makes you wonder what else the curators are black-washing from our history.

Among the “more than 36,000 artifacts” collected, the museum’s director, Lonnie G. Bunch III, could set aside only a sliver of room, and that was to smear Thomas. The museum spotlights Anita Hill, who famously accused Thomas of sexual harassment during his 1991 Supreme Court confirmation hearings before the Senate. Hill is included in an exhibition about blacks in the 1990s that “features testimonies trumpeting her courage and the surge of women’s activism that ensued,” wrote the Daily Signal.

Many people who worked for Thomas when he was Chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), where Hill alleged the harassment occurred, also discredited Hill’s claim at the time.

Bunch noted on the museum’s website that “there are few things as powerful and as important as a people, as a nation that is steeped in its history.” What he meant was the distorted history he chooses to make important.

Like him or loathe him, Thomas belongs in that museum. Born into poverty in Georgia, Thomas was raised in the segregated south by his grandparents and experienced racism by whites. Despite the odds, he graduated from Yale Law School. In 1982, President Ronald Reagan appointed him chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, where he turned around an agency in fiscal disarray — with negligent accounting and a history of not enforcing equal opportunity laws.

While black Democrats want to mock Thomas as an “Uncle Tom” or “Lawn Jockey,” he boasts a better record of improving blacks’ lives than President Barack Obama.

In 1983 as chairman of the EEOC, Thomas negotiated over a $40 million settlement in a discrimination lawsuit against General Motors. About $10 million went to fund scholarships at historically black colleges and universities, as well as other schools such as the University of Pittsburgh and Yale. Grants also were given to the Society of Women Engineers, the National Urban League, Inroads, the National Hispanic Scholarship Fund, and the Minority Leaders Fellowship Program of the Washington Center.

While working at the Department of Education, Thomas disagreed with the Reagan administration’s decision to support Bob Jones University when the IRS revoked its tax-exempt status because of racially discriminatory polices, including a ban on interracial dating. In 1992, the Supreme Court was waiting to hear an appeal of the case by the school when Reagan’s Justice Department, which first asked the court to hear the case, decided not to pursue it.

“Like most blacks who worked in the Reagan administration, I supported the original IRS decision and was shocked when the Justice Department backed down and let the university off the legal hook. This made us feel like non-entities within the administration, and exposed us to scorn and ridicule from without,” wrote Thomas in My Grandfather’s Son.

Thomas’ long opposition to affirmative action also comes from his life experience. He wrote in his book that he felt he had been tricked by being made to mention race on his application to Yale.

“As much as it stung to be told that I’d done well in the seminary despite my race, it was far worse to feel that I was now at Yale because of it.”

In a tweet I made referencing how “awful” it was for the black museum to leave Thomas out of its exhibits, Fox Business News host Charles Payne tweeted:

“Thomas is personification of MLK dream-achieving success through hard work & content of character ‪@Oprah please fix this.”

Oprah Winfrey contributed $21 million to the museum. I refuse to call it by its full name, because this is America — and blacks haven’t been from Africa since the 17th Century, when they were forcibly brought here as slaves. But it’s sad that people have to ask a celebrity like Oprah Winfrey to tell the museum to do its job, not politicize it.

Trump rebounds in second debate with Hillary

First published October 10, 2016 in the Toronto Sun

He’s back!

Rising from the ashes of what many thought was a torched campaign, Donald Trump delivered an exacting debate performance against Hillary Clinton on Sunday night.

He stumbled in the first few minutes to answer the question about the video of his lewd sex talk with NBC’s Billy Bush, but quickly gained his footing. For more than 90 minutes, Trump assailed former president Bill Clinton’s character and effectively portrayed Hillary as an untrustworthy, career politician.

After apologizing for his locker room talk and saying he was embarrassed by it, Trump trained his focus on Bill’s philandering. He reminded the town hall audience that the media and some within his party are trying to hold him to a different standard than they did Bill.

“If you look at Bill Clinton, far worse. Mine are words and his was action. His was what he’s done to women. There’s never been anybody in the history of politics in this nation that’s been so abusive to women. So you can say any way you want to say it, but Bill Clinton was abusive to women,” Trump said.

He is absolutely correct. In 1992, Bill Clinton’s numerous affairs almost destroyed his campaign. Then, of course, after Bill became president, his extremely lewd affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky surfaced during Congress’ impeachment proceedings against him.

The former president stood in front of the American people with his wife at his side and lied that “I did not have sexual relations with that woman.”

“Hillary Clinton attacked those same women and attacked them viciously,” Trump reminded the town hall audience.

“So don’t tell me about words. I am absolutely — I apologize for those words. But it is things that people say. But what President Clinton did, he was impeached, he lost his licence to practice law. He had to pay an $850,000 fine to one of the women. Paula Jones, who’s also here tonight,” Trump concluded.

Refusing to address her husband’s behaviour, Hillary responded: “When I hear something like that, I am reminded of what my friend, Michelle Obama, advised us all: When they go low, you go high.”

She then painted her opponent as a man who hates Mexicans and Muslims.

Trump effectively honed in on Hillary’s deliberate deletion of 33,000 emails while she was secretary of state as a means to lie and deceive the American people.

If elected, Trump promised to hire a special prosecutor to conduct an investigation.

Then the debate became like a boxing match, with Trump throwing all the winning punches.

Hillary said Trump was lying and that “it’s just awfully good that someone with the temperament of Donald Trump is not in charge of the law in our country.”

“Because you’d be in jail,” snipped Trump, to huge cheers from the audience.

Saying it was a mistake for her to use a private server while secretary of state, Hillary added: “I take classified materials very seriously and always have.”

To which Trump cornered her with a two-three punch on her duplicity and lies.

“And yet she didn’t know the word — the letter C on a document. Right? She didn’t even know what that word — what that letter meant,” Trump said.

And he reminded voters that Hillary’s defence was that the emails she deleted were personal.

“She said the 33,000 emails had to do with her daughter’s wedding, number one, and a yoga class,” Trump added.

The debate was “one on three,” with moderators ABC News’ Martha Raddatz and CNN’s Anderson Cooper ganging up on Trump. But Trump outperformed expectations. But will he keep his cool? That’s always the question.

Liberal media launches another full-frontal attack on Donald Trump

First published October 2, 2016 in the Toronto Sun

Here we go again with the liberal media’s latest full-throated, full-frontal attack on Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump.

The New York Times revealed Trump reported a $916-million loss on his 1995 income tax returns, which could have allowed him not to pay taxes for 18 years. Please note the emphasis on “could.”

Yet, buried deep beneath the titillating headline “Donald Trump tax records show he could have avoided taxes for nearly two decades, The Times found,” are the reporters’ admissions that this was perfectly legal.

“The tax experts consulted by the Times said nothing in the 1995 documents suggested any wrongdoing by Mr. Trump.”

In fact, reporters explain toward the end of the article that “Under I.R.S. rules in 1995, net operating losses could be used to wipe out taxable income earned in the three years before and the 15 years after the loss.”

My reaction — like so many other Trump supporters — was “so what”? Why is this even a news story?

General Electric aggressively avoids paying federal income taxes every year and was topic of much media discussion in 2011.

Why are people acting shocked that Trump legally didn’t pay taxes in 1995? Why would any smart hardworking American voluntarily give the federal government more of their money to waste and redistribute to others?

Clearly, Trump has a “sophisticated” understanding of America’s tortuous tax code.

In a statement to the Times, the Trump campaign wrote:

“Mr. Trump has paid hundreds of millions of dollars in property taxes, sales and excise taxes, real estate taxes, city taxes, state taxes, employee taxes and federal taxes.”

The statement continued, “Mr. Trump knows the tax code far better than anyone who has ever run for president and he is the only one that knows how to fix it.”

The Times also noted that Trump isn’t the only wealthy person to benefit from this tax provision that “that is particularly prized by America’s dynastic families,” like Bill and Hillary Clinton, for example.

But the Times doesn’t go into any detail about the way the Clintons have protected their wealth or the fact that, since 1997, when the Clinton Foundation — aka Hillary’s Super PAC was founded — it has raised $2 billion to help promote the Clintons’ endeavours.

Moreover, the liberal mainstream media has gone radio silent on allegations about Hillary allowing the Clinton Foundation to sell access to the State Department to the highest bidders. After reviewing a partial release of Hillary’s State Department calendars, the Associated Press found that 85 out of the 154 non-government employees, who met or spoke with Secretary Clinton, donated $156 million to the Clinton Foundation.

What this article proves is that “the New York Times, like the establishment media in general is an extension of the Clinton Campaign, the Democratic Party and their global special interests,” the Trump campaign stated.

Why isn’t the media talking about the FBI and Department of Justice’s investigation into Hillary’s e-mails and the fact that two of Hillary’s close aides have been given immunity to testify?

“Hillary Clinton is a corrupt public official who violated federal law,” alleged the Trump campaign. “Donald Trump is an extraordinary successful private businessman who followed the law and created tens of thousands of jobs for Americans.”

But the New York Times and its liberal media comrades want to go bonkers over Trump legally avoiding paying more taxes than he should — 20 years ago.

Mud flies in lead-up to historic presidential debate

First published September 25, 2016 in the Toronto Sun

With the most anticipated the presidential debate in modern history slated for Monday night, the mud is already flying.

While weary Democrat Hillary Clinton hasn’t been seen for days while holed up in a debate practice bunker, billionaire, reality TV star and Hillary friendster Mark Cuban kicked off the pre-show fireworks.

“Just got a front row seat to watch ?@HillaryClinton overwhelm ?@realDonaldTrump at the ‘Humbling at Hofstra’ on Monday. It Is On!” Cuban tweeted Sept. 22, 2016

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump didn’t tarry in responding to Cuban’s taunting tweet.

“If dopey Mark Cuban of failed Benefactor fame wants to sit in the front row, perhaps I will put Gennifer Flowers right alongside of him!”

Everyone knows by now that if you punch Trump, he’ll hit you harder. For those of you who may have forgotten the many women in former president Bill Clinton’s extramarital harem, Gennifer Flowers was one of his first mistresses.

Trump later backed away from the controversial tweet. His campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, told CNN that the Trump campaign has not formally invited Flowers to be at debate and doesn’t expect her to be there. For her part, Flowers indicated she would attend the debate.

During a 1992 infamous 60 Minutes interview with Bill and Hillary, reporter Steve Kroft questioned the couple about Bill’s affair with Flowers. He denied the decade-plus affair but under oath during for his impeachment trial, Bill confessed to starting the affair with Flowers while he was Arkansas governor.

Flowers, who revealed she had an affair with Bill in 1992, enthusiastically accepted Trump’s invitation.

“Hi Donald. You know I’m in your corner and will definitely be at the debate!” she tweeted.

Hillary’s campaign confirmed Cuban, who is an unabashed Hillary supporter, was invited to the first presidential debate at Hofstra University.

“He has the best seat we have access to. He has proven to be singularly effective in making the case against Trump and for Clinton. That is why we invited him,” an aide told CNN.

And that’s exactly why Trump invited Flowers to embarrass Hillary and prove to voters what a corrupt, flawed and self-serving candidate she is. How can a woman, who has stayed married to a serial philanderer, claim that she’s a champion for women’s rights and equality?

During that 60 Minutes interview, Hillary angrily excoriated Kroft for having the journalistic integrity to confront Bill about his misbehaving.

“I’m not sitting here like some little woman sitting by my man like Tammy Wynette. I’m sitting here because I love him and I respect him and I honour what he’s been through and what we’ve been through together. And you know if that’s not enough for people, then heck don’t vote for him,” Hillary protested.

On Monday night, Trump needs to exercise a discipline we’ve never seen before from him and expose all the reasons why voters shouldn’t “vote for her.” First and foremost, he needs to put her untrustworthiness on display with the examples of her lying and hiding information from Americans: private e-mail, Benghazi, and her health. Also, Trump must point out the numerous donations from foreign governments and businesses to the Clinton Foundation while she was secretary of state.

After reminding voters why Hillary cannot be trusted with the highest job in the country, he needs to demonstrate how she’s become a multi-millionaire from being a government servant. How can she fix what’s wrong with America when she has been on the front line of nearly every major conflict in the past three decades and has only fixed her bank account?

Clinton always right in liberal media — even when she’s not

First published September 18, 2016 in the Toronto Sun

In the eyes of the liberal media, Hillary Clinton’s always right even when she lies.

Her last acts of mendacity are about her health and the roots of the birther movement.

When her legs buckled, and she looked like the leaning tower of Pisa before being abruptly whisked away from a 9/11 memorial service, her campaign stonewalled the media for hours.

First her staff said she got “overheated,” then admitted she had pneumonia.

Instead of the media exposing Hillary’s penchant for and long history of dodging honesty, the liberal press coddled her and made her health woes Donald Trump’s. Rather than demanding Queen Hillary release health records to the 1,200-page standard that Sen. John McCain set in 2008, the liberal media made excuses for Hillary’s blatant lie.

A Washington Post article dripped with weeping pity for the liberal Queen.

“Hillary Clinton had a cough — a nasty, recurring cough that she could not kick after a week of trying.”

After her episode, the two Post reporters who authored the article wrote in fairytale fashion how Hillary rushed to her daughter Chelsea’s apartment in Manhattan, gulped down Gatorade and frolicked with her wee granddaughter Charlotte.

“Oh, how sweet, poor Hillary” — what the reporters wanted readers to feel was sympathy for a woman who habitually lies to voters for personal gain and power.

See how the liberal media acted as Hillary’s handmaidens and twisted the truth to rig the election in her favour? The article went on at length to excuse away Hillary’s lying, adding she just wanted to “power through the election” while running for the highest office in the land.

When was the last time that the liberal media passed up a chance to distort everything Trump says?

Trying to pivot bad press away from Hillary, the media blamed Trump for starting the birther movement and prodded him like a swarm of gnats to admit Obama was born in America. Never mind — that in 2007 — Hillary’s chief campaign strategist Mark Penn drafted a lengthy memo urging her to suggest Obama wasn’t born in America. There was a tonne of press coverage proving Hillary’s campaign did just that.

Last week, at the opening of his hotel in Washington, D.C., Trump gave a terse statement to feed the media vampires.

“Hillary Clinton and her campaign of 2008 started the birther controversy. I finished it. You know what I’m talking about. President Barack Obama was born in the United States, period. Now we all want to get back to making America strong and great again,” Trump declared.

After the liberal media hounded Trump to make the comments, they called his statement vile, too short and insisted he perpetuated the birther claim since 2011. Yet, the media never hounds Hillary about her 60 Minutes interview in 2008 when she questioned if Obama was a Muslim.

See what I mean? Trump never wins with the liberal press.

“A bout of pneumonia is not a major story,” declared the Washington Post in a Sept. 16, 2016 opinion piece.

But the Washington Post, along with a basket full of other news outlets, believes that generating Trump birther controversy is? The REAL story is that polls show Trump is now tied with Lyin’ Hillary at 42%.


First published September 13, 2016 in Frontpage Magazine

Sometimes the more things change, the more they stay the same. Presidents of leftist colleges across the nation are creating segregated dorms for blacks students in response to the Black Lives Matter mafia. You can’t make this stuff up.

In 1964, Democrats fought tooth and nail to preserve segregation. Racist southern Democrat Dixiecrats like Alabama Governor George Wallace refused to follow the Supreme Court’s Brown vs. Board of Education decision, the law, and even resorted to sanctioning police brutality against blacks to keep his state “separate and unequal.”

It’s more than curious that California State University of Los Angeles proudly announced segregated housing for blacks only. It’s also grotesque that black students praised the move because they feel threatened living with whites at an integrated school. I wonder if any of these students realize that their forefathers fought and died for integration during the Civil Rights Movement and this housing arrangement is a step backwards.

No, you’re not misreading anything, leftists are harkening back to the pre-Civil Rights glory days of segregation.

The newly debuted Halisi Scholars Black Living-Learning Community “focuses on academic excellence and learning experiences that are inclusive and non-discriminatory,” Cal State LA spokesman Robert Lopez told The College Fix via email.”

Does Lopez understand the definition of the word “inclusive”? Never mind, insert the laugh track run here. But Cal State isn’t alone in their backwards-leftist thinking. University of Connecticut, University of California Davis and Berkeley all offer housing for blacks only. It’s like it’s 1954 pre-Brown vs. Board of Education all over again.

If white students demanded segregated dorms in the name of “safe spaces,” they would be called racist. But today in the name of social justice, it’s just another “must do” for blacks. State’s segregated housing is the latest fruit to be borne of the Black Lives Matter movement’s grievance fleecing of college administrators. This housing debacle was part of the Black Student Union’s litany of demands presented to the school nine months ago.

In a letter of DEMANDS to President William Covino, the students wrote:
“Black students at Cal State LA have been, and still are, consistently made the targets of racist attacks by fellow students, faculty, and administration. These attacks come in many forms. Some are more overt and some subtle. Racially insensitive remarks, and micro-aggressions, by professors and students create a learning environment that is not conducive to the overall learning atmosphere.”

Yet, they listed no examples of these racist remarks or micro-aggressions in their list of 14 demands. Each one began with bold letters “WE DEMAND . . . .”

Number 13 was their housing demand:

“WE DEMAND the creation and financial support of a CSLA housing space delegated for Black students and a full time Resident Director who can cater to the needs of Black students. Many Black CSLA students cannot afford to live in Alhambra or the surrounding area with the high prices of rent. A CSLA housing space delegated for Black students would provide a cheaper alternative housing solution for Black students. This space would also serve as a safe space for Black CSLA students to congregate, connect, and learn from each other.”

They also demanded the school create a Pan-African Masters program, presumably so that black students could graduate with a useless, high-priced degree with limited job opportunities. Considering another one of their demands was “a $30 million dollar endowment to help support Black students” pay for college, why would they demand the school put more resources in African Studies degrees with little to no use in the job market?

Another laughable request was the Black Student Union’s DEMAND the school devote “$500,000 in funding for outreach programs that will focus on the recruitment of Black high school students as well as transfer students.” Regardless of a student’s qualifications, the militant group demanded that Cal State “increase the Black student body from 4% to 15% minimum within two years and to increase Black student admissions to 25% within five years.”

None of these demands address how affirmative action, namely weakening academic admission standards for blacks, has led to the high rate of blacks not graduating college at the rate of whites. Cal State’s Black Student Union’s demanding the school admit blacks to fill politically correct quotas will only lead to more blacks dropping out of college with high student loan debt because they’re not academically prepared.

If these black students don’t feel safe at an integrated university with white students, maybe they should apply to the nation’s historically black colleges and universities like Howard University, Morehouse College and Spellman College. At these schools, black students can get the segregated, all-black experience they crave because evidently that’s more important than black minds!