Search Results

IN KEEPING WITH THEIR HISTORICAL RECORD OF RACISM: Great White Wave: Democrats Suppress Historically Inclusive Slate of GOP Candidates: Bigotry to blame? (Yes.)

Republicans nominated a historically diverse, equitable, and inclusive slate of candidates in the 2022 midterms elections. Some were victorious.

Sens. Tim Scott (R., S.C.) and Marco Rubio (R., Fla.) cruised to reelection, as did Gov. Greg Abbott (R., Texas), who shrugged off his ableist critics to retain his title as America’s preeminent (and only) wheelchair-bound governor.

Rep.-elect Josh Brecheen (R., Okla.) will be the only member of the Choctaw Nation in the House of Representatives, and if Herschel Walker defeats Sen. Raphael Warnock (D., Ga.) in next month’s runoff election, there will be more black Republicans in the U.S. Senate than black Democrats.

Alas, more than a dozen Republican minorities were swept away Tuesday by what some are calling the Democratic Party’s “white wave.” In what can only be viewed as a deliberate act of bigotry, Democrats nominated white candidates to run against GOP candidates of color and proceeded to defeat those candidates, thereby excluding them from the halls of power.

Anyone familiar with the mainstream media’s coverage of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama knows that simply running against a woman or person of color is the moral equivalent of trying to exclude all women and all people of color from ever holding political office. It is tantamount to committing violence against an entire community of vulnerable citizens.

Mehmet Oz would have been the first Muslim Senator. Why do Democrats hate Muslims?

WHY IS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY SUCH A CESSPIT OF RACISM? AOC’s Biggest Problem Is That She’s AOC.

Consider this little gem: 

“It’s my resolution that perhaps we can be engaged by the end of the year,” she recalled him telling her. “And I said, ‘Oh, really? Well, you’re going to have to woo me. You’re going to have to convince me, after all this time, why I should.’ ” Ocasio-Cortez told me that she never considered marriage inevitable. Her relationship with Roberts, who is white, raised its own particular questions about identity and belonging: She wasn’t positive that an intercultural, interracial relationship would be the right fit for her.

Sorry, what? Is there anyone in America who, having read these words, can still insist that AOC is treated unfairly? If anyone else in politics had told a friendly journalist that they were not positive that “an intercultural, interracial relationship would be the right fit for them, it would have yielded a hurricane of criticism. Per Gallup, 94 percent of Americans approve of interracial marriage — and by “approve, one must assume that they do not mean “. . . but only for other people. What the hell does “she wasn’t positive that an intercultural, interracial relationship would be the right fit for her mean in practice? And who, besides AOC, would be given the benefit of the doubt when one considered such a question. I’m sitting here trying to imagine the reaction if, say, Senator Tim Scott had said that. Or Glenn Youngkin. Or Marco Rubio. Or anyone. They’d have been crucified.

Maybe, just maybe, it’s her?

Indeed.

REALCLEARINVESTIGATIONS: 1619 Project, Touted as Racial Reckoning, Ignores Democratic Party Racism.

Democrats who advanced a bill in June to remove statues of white supremacists from the U.S. Capitol ignored a central fact about those figures: All of them had been icons of their party, from Andrew Jackson’s adamantly pro-slavery vice president, John C. Calhoun, to North Carolina Gov. Charles B. Aycock, an architect of the white-supremacist campaign of 1898 that ushered in the era of Jim Crow.

At a time when governments, sports teams, schools and other bastions of American society are rushing to expunge legacies of slavery or racism, this was another instance of the Democratic Party’s failure to acknowledge that it did more than any other institution in American life to preserve the “peculiar institution” — and later enforce Jim Crow-style apartheid in the Old South.

“I think it’s absolutely fair to criticize the history of the Democrat Party when we’re literally changing the names of birds because they’re named after racists,” said Jarrett Stepman, author of “The War on History: The Conspiracy to Rewrite America’s Past,” referring to a new racism-cleansing push in, yes, ornithology.

Democrats’ circumspection in the face of this trend is especially noteworthy because it comes at a time when they are criticizing Republican legislation to block the teaching of critical race theory on the ground that the GOP wants to whitewash American history. But one of the most noteworthy efforts to reframe American history in terms of race, the New York Times’ 1619 Project, virtually ignores the Democrat Party’s role in advancing and sustaining racism in the United States.

Ignores it? It’s meant to obscure it.

IT’S GOOD TO BE THE NOMENKLATURA: In Latest Hunter Biden Racism Reveal, Corrupt Democrat Media Silent Again. “Where are the virtue-signaling elites and journalists now that records show Hunter Biden has been racist on more than one occasion? Surely, given that the Biden administration purports to be taking actions against ‘Anti-Asian Violence, Xenophobia and Bias,’ wouldn’t it make sense for left-leaning outlets to cover his family’s track record? Shouldn’t they stay the course on opposing bigotry?”

WHY IS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY SUCH A CESSPIT OF RACISM? Vaccine passports are white supremacist. “Passports will inevitably privilege white people over people of color. Whites will be advantaged for travel, for attendance at sporting events or even government functions open only to passport holders. And as CNN’s report above indicates, whites will be massively over-privileged also for employment and job assignments. Jim Crow could not have thought of a better way to widen the income and social inequality gaps between whites and POCs. But at least there are no more mean tweets, so all is well.”

WHY ARE DEMOCRAT-MONOPOLY CITIES SUCH CESSPITS OF RACISM? Chicago Mayor Lightfoot Only Granting Interviews to ‘Black or Brown Journalists.’  I wonder how Lightfoot’s white wife feels about this. I wonder how the Asian and biracial reporters feel about this.

Also in Chicago: Gun violence in Chicago sharply up from last year as 48 people are shot over the weekend, at least 6 of them fatally.

Chicago’s last Republican mayor left office in 1931.

WHY IS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY SUCH A CESSPIT OF RACISM? Texas Democratic Official Called on to Resign for Calling Senator Tim Scott an ‘Oreo:’

Liberals believe that because of their “solidarity” with black people, they can criticize white people as if their own skin is of a little darker hue. Take Lamar County Democratic Party Chairman Gary O’Connor. The Texas Democratic leader did his best Jesse Jackson impersonation in describing Scott’s statement.

“I had hoped that Scott might show some common sense, but it seems clear he is little more than an oreo with no real principles,” Lamar County Democratic Party chair Gary O’Connor wrote in a now-deleted Facebook post, referring to Scott’s rebuttal to President Biden’s congressional  address on Wednesday.

A screenshot of O’Connor’s Facebook post can be found here.

ROGER SIMON: The Democrats — and Their New UN Ambassador — Bitterly Cling to Racism.

Barack Obama famously accused red state conservatives—Republicans in general, I suppose—of “clinging to their guns and religion.”

Condescending and nasty as that was, to some extent he had a point. But another way to say the exact same thing and give it a more positive overtone is “clinging to the Bill of Rights.”

Nothing wrong with that, in fact it’s laudable, unless you’re a Marxist, another kind of totalitarian or, apparently these days, the United States ambassador to the United Nations.

The Democrats, however, “cling” to something far more pejorative and pernicious—racism.

You could say they can’t live with it, can’t live without it, but the emphasis should really be on the latter. They can’t live without it.

We have seen that virtually everywhere since Obama’s election that many of us hoped would put an end to racism. It did the reverse. It brought it back, or more accurately, talked it back, as we hadn’t seen it in decades, reversing a very positive trend the left found threatening, possibly fatal to their interests.

It was as if the Democrats and the rest of what we might eye-rollingly call the “liberal intelligentsia” (media, entertainment, academia, ad nauseam, ad tedium) suddenly panicked.

Who were they without the accusation of racism to hang around their opponent’s necks? In what way could they demonstrate their undeniable superiority?

This attitude reached its apotheosis in the Biden Administration with all the endless talk (that word again) of “systemic racism.”

But what is “systemic racism”? What is the ”system” exactly to which they refer? Racist actions have been against the law for decades, as they should be.

That is not enough for our “liberal” and “progressive” friends. There’s a system behind the whole thing, they say. Everyone’s a racist, no matter what they do or say. It’s systematized; they’re sure of it. Critical Race Theory tells us so.

And now they want the whole world, at the United Nations no less, to know just how bad our country is, how infected by racism from the start. (Maybe that’s what they mean by “The System.”)

From The Hill:

“Ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield said that white supremacy is ‘weaved’ into America’s ‘founding documents’ during a speechWednesday to the National Action Network.”

Weaved into the founding documents? Sounds pretty bad, except…

What’s really woven into the founding documents, if you read them, is the ability to self-correct, to “amend” the propositions themselves—and those amendments have been used to do such things as eliminate slavery, give blacks and women the vote, limit the number of times someone can be elected president, and so forth.

What the Founders were smart enough to know is that they weren’t perfect (who is?) and that they should structure into their documents a manner through which they could be improved as time went on and conditions changed. And that is what has happened, obviously, as in all history, by fits and starts.

Ms. Thomas-Greenfield may have virtue signaled her pompous nonsense to a particularly receptive activist audience (National Action Network) but her words were not whispered in secret. You can be sure they were noted with pleasure by Iran, Russia, China, North Korea and others of a similar ilk who will be delighted to exploit them.

Under Biden, the United States has reversed Trump and rejoined the infamous U.N. Human Rights Council, an Orwellian group dominated by the above mentioned nations that have given us such institutions of unremitting present day horror as Tehran’s Evin Prison and the concentration camps of Xinjiang Province.

These near Nazi-like fellow “progressives” are now Ms. Thomas-Greenfield’s colleagues on the UNHRC, but she urges us to approach them with “humility” because we once had slavery.

Never mind that we long ago worked our way through this and Iran, under the mullahs, and China, under Xi Jinping, are headed in the opposite direction—toward more oppression on a global scale.

But who are we to criticize? We, after all, are racists. It’s systemic. (Can you imagine what the average Tibetan, Uyghur, or Taiwanese must think when he or she hears her?)

Thomas-Greenfield is far from the only racialist in the Harris-Biden administration: There Is Absolutely No Evidence That Kristen Clarke’s Racist Letter Was Satire.