Hey White Boy, Homey Don’t Play Dat

A white man was arrested for fighting with police after a traffic stop. Jeffery McGowan had a plea deal with the prosecutor to plead to a lesser charge and serve three months probation. The police officer involved was not injured in the scuffle and had no problem with the agreement especialy since the defendant had no criminal record.

The one person who opposed the deal was the judge, Joseph Williams, who took exception to a deal that “only goes to white boys.” Then Williams let his racist views show:

In court, Williams told Assistant District Attorney Brian Catanzarite that he “for some reason comes up with I think ridiculous pleas whenever it’s a young white guy,” according to The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. “I’m just telling you what my observation is. If this had been a black kid who did the same thing, we wouldn’t be talking about three months’ probation.” MSNBC

Yes, this is his observation but he is wrong. Our judicial system is based on the merits of the case. If a black man had been involved in this incident and had no criminal record, and that is the key, he would have been offered the same deal. The reality is that many of the black men who pass through the judicial system have criminal records and it hurts their chances of getting a better deal. However, the judge also seems to ignore the revolving door that the justice system has become. All too often young black men are out of jail on one or more charges when they commit another crime. Does this racist judge expect us to give that kind of person the same chance at redemption as a man, white OR black, who has no criminal record?

Judge Williams recused himself and the plea was accepted by a white judge who did not call anyone a boy and had no claims about one race getting a better deal than another. In other words, he did his job as a judge.

I can just imagine how the left would go bonkers if the defendant was black man and a white judge said the plea deal was something only black boys got. Imagine how much more deranged the left would be if a white judge made similar comments. There would be calls for his resignation or impeachment. There would be screams of racism and Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson would be marching in the streets “No justice, no peace.”

This judge’s racist remarks will likely not be addressed. He is just speaking truth to power and trying to convince us that blacks are thrown in jail for being black instead of committing crime.

So can someone ask Judge Williams if he thinks the New Black Panthers who were let off the hook after intimidating white voters received a deal that only black boys get? Because we all know if white guys had done that Eric Holder would have screwed them to a wall.

Just like Homey the Clown, Williams don’t play dat…

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]

How Many People At The Rally And Were They Racists?

Moron's Sign
Moron Liberal’s Sign

The usual post rally numbers game is underway and people are saying that as few as 87,000 and as many as 1 million people attended the Restoring Honor event in DC. The liberal left needs to minimize the numbers because the bigger the numbers are the weaker its position becomes.

I was at the rally and I believe there were closer to a million people than to 87,000. The New Carrollton Metro station had 8000 to 10,000 people in line when I arrived. It took nearly 2 hours to get to the train and when I did get on the train the line down below was longer than when I arrived. The entire Mall was surrounded by people and the crowd extended to the Washington Monument. The open area to the left (when looking at the Lincoln Memorial) was completely full of people and the right had densely packed groups way into the wood line (they cannot be seen from the overhead shots but they were there and they were packed in there).

The crowd was mostly white (as is the population of this country) but there were quite a few people of color in attendance. I saw many, many people who were not white and they appeared to be enjoying themselves. In fact, two women of color were walking next to me on the way to the Mall and one looked to the other and said; “Can you believe he asked me where the Al Sharpton event was? I told him over there where those 10 people are. I am going down here where everyone else is.” She was amused that the person would assume that since she was not white she would be on her way to see Sharpton rather than Beck. She got a huge laugh out of it as did everyone with whom she shared the story.

I understand that the left is upset by all the attention non liberal groups get and it needs to fight it any way it can. This is why everything is labeled racist. But minimizing the crowd at this event and repeating the same tired lines about it being very white is getting old. Whites are a majority of the population and when one considers that 95% of blacks are held captive on the Democrat plantation then it is easy to see why throngs of blacks are not at these types of events. However, rejecting the validity of an event because it has too many people of one color and not enough of another makes no sense and is very dangerous. Those who think that any rally that consists of mostly white people is not valid would have to invalidate the Al Sharpton rally that consisted mostly of black people.

Additionally, this picture of the Martin Luther King “I have a dream” speech shows the crowd to be almost all black. No whites are found in the picture of the crowd. I am sure some were there but since whites made up 60%-70% of the population (probably more like 80% back then) at that time then this crowd is disproportionately black. I find that perfectly acceptable but if we are going to use the diversity of color at an event to give it credibility or validity then MLK’s speech was not credible and not valid. I would also point out that Obama’s inauguration had huge numbers of blacks in the crowd, numbers that were hugely disproportionate to their representation in the country. Does this mean that event lacked validity?

There are plenty of pictures of the crowd and they tell a story that makes it clear more than 87,000 people were there. MLK had 200,000 to 250,000 at his speech and the Restoring Honor pictures show more people than attended King’s speech so it is logical to assume that there were more than 200,000 people there. I think that the number is 600,000 to 1 million but have no way of knowing and no agency does any official counting.

It would be interesting to know how many Metro tickets were sold. That would give a good indication of how many people were there.

Suffice it to say that the event is not well received by liberals who cannot grasp the concept of honor and who cannot see anything but racism in such events. It will drive them nuts for some time to come.

I also add that there were many people opposed to Beck having this rally in the same place where MLK had his speech and on the same date that the speech occurred. Al Sharpton was very upset about this claiming that Beck was against what MLK stood for (which Sharpton erroneously believes to be the removal of state’s rights) and challenged Beck to debate the Ground Zero Mosque issue, which Sharpton supports. This challenge came as Sharpton appeared on Geraldo Rivera’s show. So does anyone else find it ironic that Sharpton complains about the location of Beck’s rally but dismisses this concern (location) from people opposed to the mosque? Thanks to Rick for this insight.

Anyone want to wager that the people offended at Glen Beck’s choice of location for his Restoring Honor rally in DC (where Martin Luther King held his I Have A Dream speech) are the same people defending the location of the mosque at Ground Zero?

Anyone?

We will hear more in the days ahead…

Here are some great pictures and interesting takes on the rally:
Affirmative Action Counting for DC Events
Leftists Could Find No Racism at Restoring Honor Rally
Wrap Up and Whitewash (Plus, who is cleaner and where is the racism)
An enormous and impassioned crowd (and from the New York Times no less)
Washington Compost (the added “mostly black” to the Sharpton crowd report later, probably in response to a comment asking why it was not reported the same way as the RH Rally)
CNN article Note how many comments refer to the WHITE crowd
Why is there this assumption that MLK and his speech were a black only thing?

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]

Howard Dean Continues Democrat Playbook On Racism

The playbook for the left is to scream racism and to scream it loud and often. The left has no other game. Its policies have failed, it has pushed an agenda on the American people that is different than that on which they campaigned and that a majority in this country opposes. That does not bother them but now that the elections are rapidly approaching they need a tactic, a diversion. And they havoe found it.

We know that the people on the JournoList had a plan to pick a target conservative and call him racist. In true Alinsky fashion, select the target, isolate the target and attack the target. We also know that screaming racism, including NAALCP resolutions about racism, are nothing more than lies designed to stir up minorities.

Mary Frances Berry admitted that the tactic was to call the TEA Party members racist even though there is NO EVIDENCE that they are any more racist than anyone else. And she said the tactic is working.

So it should come as no surprise that Howard Dean is screaming racism. He is calling the Republican party racist and he is saying that FOX News is racist for spreading lies about Shirley Sherrod. Dean is totally ignoring the fact that FOX did not air the video or discuss the story on TV until well after Sherrod was fired and that the website did not post the video until after Sherrod was fired. FOX News claims the video was not up at its website until after Sherrod was fired.

I have seen the website from the day in question and the video was up but my friend Adam explained how that could happen. News websites update frequently and sometimes the same story is updated several times. FOX posted the story about the video but did not, according to them, post the video until after Sherrod was fired. No one can prove it was up before then (and Adam explained how it could be up now and dated then) so we will take FOX at its word.

The thing that is important to note is that Dean never once stopped to consider the facts in the matter. He dismissed the truth about FOX NOT discussing the story until after Sherrod was fired. His comeback was that it was going to be on Glenn Beck. Dean has absolutely no way of knowing if that was going to be on Beck or not. And even if it was (it was not as Beck did not mention it on TV) what difference could it possibly make? If Barack Obama fired Shirley Sherrod because he was worried that the story was going to be on Glenn Beck’s program then there is a real issue at the White House.

The fear of Beck tells me that Beck has been getting most things he discusses correct and it bothers the regime. They have never called to refute anything that Beck has said. They have never corrected anything he has said and they spend much of their time saying FOX is not real news and no one should pay attention to the network or fear mongers like Beck.

If Beck is of no concern then why worry about whether a story was going to be on his show? Because he is right as he was this time. He did not mention it until the next day and he took Sherrod’s side in the issue. He discussed it on his radio program but I have not heard the entire clip so I do not know what was said. In any event, the White House was worried about Beck’s TV program. Sherrod confirmed that and so did Howard Dean.

Here is the real issue. Howard Dean is using the game plan that was spelled out by JournoList and Mary Frances Berry. He is calling the Republicans and FOX News racist because they are trying to get that accusation to stick. They want to keep saying it until people believe it. They are lying about racism for political gain. Before it was the NAALCP and now it is a failed candidate named Howard Dean.

The Democrats can be counted on for three reflexive actions. Number one they will reflexively blame George W. Bush for all the ills in the world. Number two, they will cry racism no matter what and they will continue to scream it. They do this not because it is some rampant problem but because they think hurling false accusations is proper even with something as sensitive as racism. And three, they will all reflexively blame FOX News Channel for the bad things in the world even in the face of irrefutable evidence to the contrary.

And of course, we can always count on Howard Dean to have a stupid moment.

YEEEEEEEEHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAA…

Source:
Politico

Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]

Millionaire Slaves And Millionaire Spies

An interesting weekend where we have discussions about some basketball player named LeBron James who evidently decided that he did not want to play with one team so he agreed to take less money in salary to go to a team that has a better chance of winning a championship and spies who were swapped out just like in the Cold War days.

Professional athletes change teams all the time and owners and fans get upset. It is part of the game and there is nothing unusual about it unless of course one of the players is a black basketball professional (which is a redundant statement) and he is called a coward by the owner of the team he left.

LeBron James put on a big show about his decision and ESPN had an entire show dedicated to that decision and when he decided to go to Miami instead of staying with Cleveland the Cleveland owner and the fans went nuts.

And this is where things get strange (if you can believe it). Jesse Jackson, the race baiting poverty pimp, says that poor LeBron was treated like property and the words of the owner were just like the words of a slave master.

“He speaks as an owner of LeBron and not the owner of the Cleveland Cavaliers,” the reverend said in a release from his Chicago-based civil rights group, the Rainbow PUSH Coalition. “His feelings of betrayal personify a slave master mentality. He sees LeBron as a runaway slave. This is an owner employee relationship — between business partners — and LeBron honored his contract.” ESPN

First of all, the owner sounds like a guy who felt betrayed by his star player and one could have any number of interpretations. Perhaps he felt as if LeBron was like a son to him and that he felt betrayed by a son. Jackson though, had to dive right into the slave master thing.

Here are a few questions for Jackson. How many slaves do you know of who make MILLIONS of dollars a year? How many slave masters do you know of who pay MILLIONS of dollars a year?

Jackson is a race baiting poverty pimp who sees racism in everything. He has to in order to make money. He extorts money from companies by threatening boycotts and protests, he invents racism out of thin air and he is always willing to make race an issue and he does this in order to make money.

Jackson and hs pal Sharpton have carved out good lives with lots of money all at the expense of the black community because these clowns are not in it to make things better. They need it to be worse in order to get money.

I imagine Jackson will find some way to focus attention on the Cleveland owner and then extort money from him.

To those of us in the real world, LeBron James is a good ball player who took a business decision that involved less money for a chance to win a title. That decision did not sit well with fans in Cleveland, black and white, who burned his jerseys and it did not sit well with the owner who felt betrayed.

It had nothing to do with slavery, a slave master mentality or anything else racial. Jackson is a moron who wants to horn in on the publicity of the James decision and race is the only thing he really knows.

Interestingly, Rush Limbaugh predicted last week that James would select Miami or another team in a state with no taxes and said that James would not select New York to avoid the 12-20 million dollars in state taxes. Looks like Rush was correct.

Speaking of Rush, VP Joe BiteMe equated him with the Russian spies while appearing on the Leno show. BiteMe was on Leno discussing with Leno the spy swap that just took place. We found 10 Russian spies who had been living here for a long time and who evidently did not gather much intelligence. I think they liked living here and did as little as possible.

In any event, Leno was asking the VP why we only got 4 spies when we gave up 10. During the discussion Biden indicated that a little known aspect of the deal was they wanted Russia to take Limbaugh. So Biden equated Limbaugh with the spies.

I do not think Limbaugh is the issue. We should send gaffe a minute Biden to Russia though he might have been there in the past to work on anti American agendas with John Kerry and Ted Kennedy, who knows.

There are a number of entities or people Biden could have mentioned including The New York Times and Senator Leahy and the fact that he chose Limbaugh shows how much this man gets under their skin.

Limbaugh clearly bothers Biden, Obama, and the rest of the regime.

Then again, maybe Joe is jealous that Limbaugh sold his New York Penthouse for nearly 12 MILLION dollars.

That was the last thing Limbaugh needed to do to break free of the city after he left for Florida a few years ago in order to escape the punishing taxes of New York. With that penthouse sold the city will no longer rob Limbaugh of millions.

LeBron James must have been listening…

Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]

Once Again The Liberals Rewrite History

Robert Byrd of West Virginia died earlier this week and was eulogized on Friday. Byrd had a long career in the Senate and directed billions of taxpayer dollars to his state so he could get everything named after him. They might rename the state after him by the time it is all said and done.

One thing that happens when people have long public lives that are controversial is that their friends try to whitewash the history or rewrite it. Bill Clinton did this when he indicated that Byrd had a fleeting association with the KKK. Byrd had more than a fleeting association. He was also, contrary to what is NOW being reported, in the Klan long enough to break in his sheets.

Robert Byrd was a recruiter for the Klan while he was in his 20s and 30s. This is contrary to his claim of losing interest after a year and not paying his dues any longer. We also know that Byrd was an Exalted Cyclops in the KKK. This is not something he would have been put into immediately. It takes time to be appointed to these things so it is unlikely that he had only a fleeting association with the KKK.

This is how liberals like Bill Clinton rewrite history. They and their allies in the media, those who never held the racist views of Byrd against him because he is a liberal, whitewash the facts.

People like Clinton claim there was a fleeting association and we are supposed to believe that it was solely because Byrd wanted to get elected (as Clinton claims).

If he did this only to get elected (which is moronic to even suggest) then why would we want him in office? The implication from Clinton is that Byrd was not some foaming at the mouth racist and only joined the KKK in order to get the votes of all those people who were. If this is the case he is no better than they and anyone who would join a hate filled racist group just to get elected is not worth having in office (though one could argue that joining the Democrat party amounts to joining a hate filled racist group in order to get elected).

And if we are to believe that Byrd did not join because he is a racist but only to get elected then why did he say so many racist things? Why did he oppose Civil Rights Legislation? Why did he lament that we needed a resurgence of the KKK (well after that year he supposedly became disinterested)? [Wikipedia]

Supporters of Byrd (liberal apologists) will claim that Byrd apologized for this and was truly sorry. While it is true that Byrd has apologized there is no indication that he actually meant it. How do we know, as Bill Clinton might suggest, that the only reason he apologized was so he could get reelected? How do we know he actually repented?

Late in his life he advised young people wanting to get in politics not to get the albatross of the KKK around their necks. He never denounced the KKK in the advice, he only indicated that membership in it would harm a political career. Later in his life he used the word “white nigger” on television to refer to poor white people and nary a word was said by the same people who demanded Don Imus be fired for saying “nappy headed hos”. What would posses a person who repented for his racist past to use such a word? We know he got away with it because he is liberal but why would he even use it?

Perhaps Byrd was truly serious and he had changed his ways. I know people who were racist and who later in life realized they had been wrong all along. It happens and maybe this is true with Byrd.

However, it is not right to sugarcoat or whitewash his past in an effort to rewrite history or give legitimacy to what he did. Byrd was in the Klan longer than he led us to believe and longer than Clinton’s assertion of a “fleeting association” and Byrd was certainly a racist much longer than he was in the Klan. Regardless of what the KKK speculates or Bill Clinton says, the history is there and it suggests a different story.

And it suggests that saying Robert Byrd had a fleeting association with the KKK is like saying Bill Clinton had a fleeting association with sexual misconduct.

The thing that works out best is that Byrd is no longer in the Senate so his sorry butt will not have to be abused to get votes. I did not like him but it was pathetic to see him wheeled around in a snowstorm at midnight just to have enough votes to pass something.

Be kind of funny if that is what killed him…

Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]