If there is any silver-lining for Democrat Governor of Virginia Ralph “Coonman” Northam this past week facing some backlash over his support and promotion of infanticide and the surfacing of a photo of him wearing blackface standing next to someone in a KKK robe and hood is that according to a Morning Consult Poll taken after these scandals, 50% of Virginia Democrats still support the racist baby-killer.
Granted, that number dropped by 20 points from 70, so good for the 20% of Virginia Democrats who have a conscience, but a full 50% of Virginia Democrats see the news regarding his support for killing babies, see the news regarding his racist picture, and find absolutely nothing wrong with that.
And no, it’s not the same as Kavanaugh or Trump. What people might say regarding the photo is that Kavanaugh did stuff in college too and we, conservatives, forgave him for it. That is completely wrong.
The difference between Northam and Kavanaugh is that there is EVIDENCE that Northam was a racist. It’s certainly backed up by the fact that he ADMITTED to being the one in the photo. With Kavanaugh, there was zero evidence (and still there is zero evidence) that he did the things that were alleged about him.
And it’s different from Trump because, despite what the Left says about him, he’s not racist. They claim the Wall is racist, or the “Muslim” ban is racist (it only applies to terror-related Middle East countries, and not even all of them), or that just about anything he says ever is racist. But like I mentioned previously, there is actual evidence to Northam being racist. And again, he admitted to it.
If someone did not do what they are accused of having done, they deny it, not admit it immediately and then deny it.
Not that it matters much to Virginia Democrats. 50% still support him, only 25% disapprove of him and only 24% are unsure about him. So 24% of Virginia Democrats are mulling over just how wrong it is for him to promote infanticide and being in a photo featuring him wearing blackface.
Contrast that with Independents going from 42% approval to only 20% and Republicans going from 31% (fascinating that he had so much support from Republicans before) to only 15%.
And this is not even mentioning that, upon Northam denying that he was in the photo after already having admitted to it, his defense was not simply that that wasn’t him. It was that it couldn’t have been him because he was wearing blackface at a different time and place.
This is what he said: “My belief that I did not wear that costume or attend that party stems, in part, by my clear memory of other mistakes I made in the same period of my life. That same year, I did participate in a dance contest in San Antonio in which I darkened my face as part of a Michael Jackson costume”.
That’s like saying: “You see, your honor, I couldn’t have possibly killed the victim at the time in question because I remember perfectly well that I was killing someone else at that time.”
But even with this pouring-gasoline-on-a-fire of a defense, half of Virginia Democrats still support him.
I may sound surprised, but I really shouldn’t be. If Democrats don’t abandon their own when someone sleeps with an intern, keeps tens of thousands of classified government emails in a server in a bathroom, drives into a lake and kills a woman, takes a photo with Louis Farrakhan, puts Japanese Americans in an internment camp during WWII, allows for the nuclearization of North Korea, allows for the nuclearization of Iran, insists to the Soviets that Reagan will not be in power forever and they should wait on Democrats to retake power for negotiations, leaves Americans to die in Benghazi, allows for the running of guns through the southern border and weaponizes government agencies to target and destroy an opposing candidate, then they aren’t likely to abandon a racist baby-killer.
The biggest of the scandals about Northam for Democrats is not the baby-killing scandal, but the racist one. Elected Democrats could not give one single damn about what he said regarding killing a born-alive baby. They only cared when he admitted to wearing blackface in a photo.
And not even because they think it’s bad to do that, but because they have to be able to keep one of their most used weapons: calling Republicans racist.
That’s the only reason they want him gone. They ignored the baby-killing comment because they secretly liked what he said and support it (not really all that secretly, but still) and are likely saddened over the fact that they have to try and insist he steps down from office over the photo.
The funny thing is that the longer he stays as governor, the worse it will be for Democrats because any conservative, especially Trump, can point to him and say “you guys call us racist, but you still have ‘Coonman’ running Virginia, killing babies left and right”.
I would normally say that, regardless of party, I would want such a horrible person to step down from office, but I don’t in this instance. I want him to remain. It’s not like Virginia’s next governor would be any better for the state or for babies. Democrats are moving towards normalizing and supporting full-on infanticide if it’s in the name of women’s “health” or “liberation” or some other crap.
So it’s best if he is stubborn enough to remain, so that he gives us another arrow in our quiver.
But regardless of what happens, it speaks volumes that half of Virginia Democrats still support and approve of Coonman. Again, not so surprising when knowing that there is next to no scandal that will make most Democrats abandon the person in question.
Bill Clinton did not become an inconvenience to the Democrats until around and just before the #MeToo movement. Obama is still revered as one of the greatest presidents they’ve ever had, despite all the evil and obvious things he did. FDR is considered a Democrat legend despite putting Japanese Americans in internment camps.
The reason they don’t abandon them over these things is because they are a brotherhood of evil. Now, I usually don’t lump in Democrat voters with these people, since most are either uninformed or altogether misinformed about things, but this is a national story, many other elected Democrats are calling for his resignation and there is plenty of information out there regarding this. There isn’t much of a chance of being uninformed or misinformed about this.
So being ignorant about this is not an option, which leaves us with two options: either these people are outrageously stupid or evil.
But again, what makes things worse is the fact that it’s the racist photo, not the advocating of infanticide, that is ruining his career. Quite frankly, had that photo not surfaced, he would probably be considered a Democrat hero in their circles. Openly, they still feel as though supporting this or advocating for this might be a step too far, but give them time and this will become mainstream.
These people fight to ensure everything that is evil is considered good so that it may become mainstream. They are rotten to the core.
And as far as the Democrat voters go, kudos to the ones that no longer support Coonman, but shame on the ones that still do for any given reason.
“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
I’ve often held the belief, which is often proven to be true, that the Left is chock-full of racists and bigots. That just about everyone in the media focuses on the skin color or gender of a person more-so than the content of that person’s character, at least depending on the political leanings of said person. As a good example, look at the Mississippi Senate race held a couple of days ago, where the Republican candidate, Cindy Hyde-Smith defeated Democrat candidate Mike Espy. Despite the fact that she’s the first woman Mississippi has ever elected to Congress, that fact is ignored because she’s a Republican.
However, that is not the main focus of this article. The point I’m trying to make here is that the Left tends to look at someone’s skin-deep characteristics and nothing beyond that. They do this so often, that it appears as though it’s become second-nature to the Left to be racist. What do I mean?
A study from a couple of researchers from Yale and Princeton found that “over a 25-year-period, white Democratic political candidates patronized minorities by dumbing down their language so as to appear more approachable,” according to the Daily Wire.
The researchers analyzed words used in over 70 speeches delivered by both Democrats and Republicans over a 25-year-period, with around half of the speeches being delivered to mostly minority audiences, and being compared to speeches delivered to mostly white audiences. According to the Daily Wire: “two elements of the speech were analyzed: words related to competence and words related to warmth.”
“The results showed Democratic candidates used fewer competence-related words speaking to minorities than when speaking to white audiences. Republican candidates did not change their discourse."
The researchers also tested “white participants to see how they would interact with a hypothetical or presumed-real interaction partner. Half of the time, the partner was given a name that ostensibly sounded white, such as ‘Emily’, while the rest of the time the partner received a name that sounded like a non-white, such as ‘Lakisha.’ Participants chose from a list of words, all of which had been rated for their warmth or competence, to use to send an email to the partner,” according to the Daily Wire.
The result was that those who skewed to the Left would make sure not to use words that would make them appear to be highly competent, while conservatives would not change their language. Cydney Dupree, one of the researchers, said that “It was kind of an unpleasant surprise to see this subtle but persistent effect. Even if it’s ultimately well-intentioned, it could be seen as patronizing.”
Dupree also said, regarding finding such a pattern of behavior in Democrat politicians, that “It was really surprising to see that for nearly three decades, Democratic presidential candidates have been engaging in this predicted behavior.”
Now, I am not really surprised to see this sort of thing being the case. I have known for a very long time now that the Left is largely racist and bigoted. Regardless of someone’s skin color, they are like this. I don’t think I have to point to each and every instance of hatred that stems from the Left on the basis of skin color, because if I did, I would be here all week. And even though their new favorite target for their incessant need to be openly racist is white people, they still hold true to their old Democrat values of bigotry against minorities.
And this much is clear if, throughout three decades, they’ve been shown to display a particular pattern of speech that differs depending on the type of audience they have. One such instance, though not necessarily regarding race, is when either Hillary or Bill Clinton would hold some speech or rally in a Southern state, such as their home state of Arkansas, and would use a more exaggerated and noticeable southern drawl when speaking to southerners than they otherwise would, say, while in New York or Washington D.C.
Obama was similar, to some extent. Whenever there were more black people with him, he would act more like a black guy than he would otherwise.
So this entire thing comes down partly to racism, but also to an even larger problem with the Left that they would never admit to being a problem: they think they are better than everyone else around them.
Barack Obama often tends to speak and just look at people with his chin really high up and like he’s looking down at someone. He is the prime example of someone who downright looks down on those around him and thinks himself better than everyone else.
It’s because of this largely baseless belief that they are better and smarter than everyone else that they instinctively end up dumbing things down to those whom they believe are inferior to them: minorities.
The reason Kanye West said that there still was slavery going on in the U.S. (paraphrasing, of course) is that black people, through their vote, still largely are slaves to the Left. Slaves of thought. It’s the reason I continue to call the Democrat Party a slave plantation of thought. Because that is largely what they are. Of course, black people are not the only slaves in such a plantation. This plantation includes anyone who does not think for themselves and agrees with the hive mind of the collective Left. There is no data, apart from man-made data, of man-made climate change? “Bull! There is consensus within the scientific community that it’s real, so it has to be!”
Science has long proven that males are male and females are female and there can be no alteration of that, barring some sort of chromosome-level accident? “Bollocks! Gender is fluid and you’re a hater if you say otherwise!” Don’t know why I went British for that one, but let’s continue.
The point is that the Left holds people’s individual thought almost for ransom. And as a result, they end up instinctively holding minorities in a lower regard. I didn’t exactly need a study to know just how racist the Left is, but it is always good to basically confirm such beliefs. The fact that this has been happening for three decades (and likely longer, but the study had to set some sort of limit) tells me the Left’s very racism, bigotry and hatred is on the genetic level.
I’ve said this before, but it’s in their very DNA to be this way. And given the response from one of the researchers, it appears as though she was disheartened to see the results of the study. She even went as far as to say that it was an “unpleasant surprise” to see this behavior. The good news is that she at least was capable of recognizing that this could easily be seen as patronizing behavior (because it is). Though she still tried to insist that it was well-intended, the proof is in the pudding: the Left treats minorities like idiots, while conservatives treat minorities like they would anyone else.
Here’s hoping such a revelation leads to these researchers to understand that there is a deeply-rooted problem within the Left that is not likely to ever change.
“The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
One of the biggest stories post-confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh has been a short portion of a segment on Don Lemon’s show on CNN. And this segment showcases the kind of ignorant and blatant racism that exists on the Left in more than one way.
Talking about Kanye West and his support for President Donald Trump, Don Lemon had three different guests on. Two of them were black (former Congressman Bakari Sellers and CNN contributor Tara Setmeyer) and another person, a white guy. But the bigger things to focus on are what the two black guests said on the show.
The Bakari Sellers started by saying: “Kanye West is what happens when Negroes don’t read. And we have this now, and Donald Trump is going to use this and pervert it, and he’s gonna have somebody who can stand with him and take pictures.”
At this, Don Lemon was not shocked by his words. Matter of fact, he laughed when he saw the white guy’s face reacting to Bakari’s use of the n-word and his overall offensive statement which I will get to momentarily.
Then, Tara chimed in on the racism: “Listen, black folks are about to trade Kanye West in the racial draft, okay? They’ve had it with him. And he’s an attention whore like the President. He’s all of a sudden now the model spokesperson; he’s the token Negro of the Trump Administration? This is ridiculous. And no one should be taking Kanye West seriously; he clearly has issues; he’s already been hospitalized…”
There are a lot of different things I could say here that would ultimately make this article too long. So, I will try my best at summarizing.
Primarily, it should come as no surprise that this is insanely offensive to black people. These two ignoramuses call Kanye West, a Trump supporter, things like an attention whore, a token Negro, and insult his intelligence, saying that this is what happens when black folks don’t read. To me, that sounds exactly like something a Grand Wizard in the KKK would say. West’s support for Trump characterizes him as an ignorant black man who doesn’t read and has mental issues.
This is adamantly disgusting by CNN and not a single person on the Left gives a damn. Why? Because it’s black people calling West a token Negro and other things.
Which brings us to the other racist part of CNN. They knew damn well that if they had white people calling him a Negro, that would be considered racist. So they had other black people to do their bidding (kinda like slavery?) and call him these horrible, racist things. To the Left, a black person is not considered racist if they do or say something adamantly racist against someone else.
Particularly so if the person they target disagrees with the Left. I was going to say “particularly if the person they target is a conservative” but I would be hard-pressed to call West a conservative, at least for now. It’s gone past the point of political labels. Anyone that even remotely disagrees with the Left is prey to be slaughtered. Someone who must be totally destroyed.
And since West is a black Trump supporter, the Left feels comfortable having black people attack him using race.
Now, as I promised, I will now analyze what these disgusting people actually said.
“Kanye West is what happens when Negroes don’t read…” Let’s be honest, there is nothing but racism and condescension here. To think this man was ever in Congress would shock me if I were not already aware of the Left’s hideous nature. And this sentence alone exposes how bigoted they are. Not only that, the fact that CNN had a black guy say this shows that not only are they bigoted, but cowards as well, hiding behind Bakari’s skin color.
Not only was that insanely offensive, it is also flat-out incorrect. Kanye West escaped the Left’s slave plantation, which is more than I can say for Lemon, Bakari and Tara. They call him uneducated and ignorant when they themselves are uneducated and ignorant. That’s not to say they did not go to college or public school. That is to say, however, that they were not educated. Rather, they were indoctrinated in the poisons of the Left.
For anyone to abandon the Democrat Party, they are abandoning the party of segregation during the Civil War. The party of racism that fought to keep slaves. The party of racism that was largely split in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I would make a “pot calling the kettle black” joke about these disgusting people, but that might be misconstrued as racist just because the word “black” is included, so I will hold my tongue there.
Moving on to what Tara said, that was both offensive to black people AND to people who struggle with mental health. So that’s a double-whammy of a horrible statement made by a horrible person.
But perhaps the most horrendously ironic part comes outside of this particular segment. The same people that are calling Kanye West a token Negro are the same people who call Taylor Swift “brave” for supporting the Democrat candidate in her state of Tennessee.
This is the double-standard set forth by the Left. Any black person that supports Trump and/or is conservative is a token Negro. Any woman that is conservative is a traitor to her gender, as though that’s a line people should not cross. Any Hispanic that is conservative is a traitor to other Hispanics. Ditto for gay people who are conservative.
Anyone who is a conservative and is a minority is a traitor to their minority in the Left’s eyes. So allow me to retort in a few ways:
First, that’s dumb.
Second, that’s racist. My race does not defy who I am. While I am Hispanic, that does not mean being a Leftist. Far from it, considering most Hispanics tend to be Christian.
Third, if being Hispanic means I have to be a Democrat, then I sexually identify as a white man. That does not even make any sense, but that’s no longer a requirement in the Left’s world.
But this all speaks to the Left’s sense of entitlement. They feel as though they OWN minorities. That is why they say that conservative minorities are traitors to their race, gender, etc. By saying that, they expose the fact that they fundamentally believe they own minorities.
They believe they own women all-the-while claiming they fight for their liberation. They believe they own black people all-the-while calling for supposed racial equality. They believe they own minorities. This has been a staple of their political leanings since even before the Democrat Party was founded.
Even the 13th Amendment, which prohibits people from owning another person, can’t keep these new-age KKKers from believing they own people.
Perhaps it is for this reason that I should not be so surprised that CNN would have some black people attack Kanye West based solely on his race. However, that does not make it any less disgusting to witness.
CNN should be ashamed, but they clearly aren’t.
“A worthless person, a wicked man, goes about with crooked speech, winks with his eyes, signals with his feet, points with his finger, with perverted heart devises evil, continually sowing discord; therefore calamity will come upon him suddenly; in a moment he will be broken beyond healing.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is 100% free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent straight into your inbox. And it’s easy too! All you have to do is click on the box on the right, input your email address and click “subscribe”. That’s it! So make sure to check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
That may seem like a fairly vague statement to make, so allow me to explain it further. In today’s age, people think that white people are the only ones who can be racist. They believe that non-white people are incapable of being racist by definition and that only white people can be racist. The reason behind this, if you can even really call it a reason, is that white people have “all the power”, with them being the majority race in the country. The “power” rests within white people, so anyone without said “power” cannot be racist.
But here’s the thing: the Left is the only side of the political spectrum that believes this. The New York Times hired an anti-white racist to their editorial board knowing full well how much she hates white people. And most recently, a writer for NBC News, Chris Mohny, tried to explain to his fellow white people why non-whites can’t be racist.
His article is titled: “Are White People Jokes Racist? Let A Fellow White Explain.”
He writes: “White people, even though we don’t like to admit it, know that racism isn’t just about who you like or don’t like. Racism has always been and always will be about possessing, maintaining and applying power. Racist jokes told by white people about non-white people superficially mock this or that alleged racial characteristic, just as Jeong’s tweets about white people did. But rhetorically, racist jokes are told to reassure white people about their top spot on the pyramid, and to reinforce that position by degrading nonwhite people who encounter such jokes.”
I won’t quote the entire thing because it’s one massive pile of insane turd that all boils down to: if you’re mad that nonwhites are making fun of white people, you’re racist. Which is inherent nonsense.
He argues that racist jokes against white people are ok because they are a culmination of centuries of nonwhites struggling in what he calls a pyramid of “institutional racism”, where the white people are at the top, and thus, cannot actually be hurt by jokes or statements such as the ones Jeong made.
This is flat out bull that goes against everything Dr. Martin Luther King dreamt of. He dreamt that his children and grandchildren (paraphrasing, of course) would be judged not on the color of their skin but the content of their character. He didn’t dream that one day, his children and grandchildren could make racist jokes and abuse white people just as white people (Democrats, actually) abused them.
This guy’s view of racism is devoid of any sort of sense. Racism, according to a simple Google search, means “prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior.”
That doesn’t say “prejudice, discrimination or antagonism directed against someone of color from someone who is white.”
If I were to call this writer a “honky” or a “cracker”, how is that any better than calling a black man the N-word or calling a Hispanic “beaner” or “taco taco, burrito burrito”? It’s still calling someone of a specific race a specific-race-related slur.
Is it okay if I call the writer either of those two words because I’m a Hispanic and thus cannot be racist? Or can a white person also do that? And in turn, can I call a fellow Hispanic “beaner” because I am Hispanic myself and thus cannot be racist?
See how dumb such an argument is? But the cherry on top of this pile of crazy crap is when he says: “calling non-white people racist is the closest most of us will be able to get to using the n-word in public, and some of us do.”
You really gotta wonder what goes on in these people’s heads. Let me tell you something right now: calling out actual racism, regardless of who is saying it, is not racist. Twitter briefly suspended Candace Owens, a black conservative activist, for reiterating Jeong’s tweets, replacing the word “white” with the word “black”.
So it’s not that nonwhites can’t be racist. No, at the end of the day, it’s that LIBERALS can’t be racist. That is why I’m saying this is all political.
Much in the same way Al Gore and Leonardo Di Caprio are excused for leaving massive carbon footprints because they support environmentalist causes, the Left is allowed to be racist because they claim to be “against racism”.
It’s much in the same way that Antifa can use fascist tactics of violence and harassment to shut down the speech of someone else because they claim to be against fascism.
In their mind, it’s not that white people are racist. It’s that white people are racist if they do or say things the Left doesn’t like, such as calling out the actual racism of a Leftist member of the media. And it’s not that nonwhite people can’t be racist. It’s that nonwhite people can only be racist when they are not part of the Left.
Donald Trump was never considered or called a racist in his 70 years of life before he decided to run for President in the Republican ticket. Candace Owens, until she opens her mouth and speaks her mind, is not considered to be racist because of the color of her skin. But once she does speak and the Left doesn’t like what she’s saying, that’s when she becomes a racist.
And I simply love it whenever the seemingly white-dominated Antifa strolls down the streets decrying white power and supremacy while shouting at black and Hispanic-looking police officers. It’s comedy gold.
So you see, it’s not really about white people being the only racist ones and nonwhites not being able to be racist particularly if they discriminate against white people. It’s about conservatives being labeled racists whenever we speak our minds. It’s about conservatives being labeled racists whenever we call out the actual racism of a Leftist.
The problem with labeling us like this is that the Left’s history is right there for anyone to look at. We know full well that the Democrat Party fought against the emancipation of the slaves. We know full well that Democrats were more supportive of segregation than Republicans were (A vast majority of Republicans supported the Civil Rights Act of 1964 compared to most Democrats being split on it).
Historically, the biggest threat to nonwhites in America has been the Democrat Party. And yes, I’m fully aware that the Left comes up with the argument of “there was a switch and now the Republicans are racist and the Democrats aren’t.” The funny thing is that they can’t say when that switch happened or even how it could have happened. I doubt the Republicans one day asked the Democrats to switch platforms for a bit and see where that would take them, and the Democrats were all of a sudden okay with defending black people.
It’s an asinine argument based on no facts whatsoever. Because here’s the thing: racism courses through the Democrats’ veins. They see everyone else as inferior and, like the bullies they are, choose to discriminate against anyone for any particular reason.
The only reason they are seemingly okay with minorities today is: 1) They would never be elected to power if they still proclaimed the same beliefs as they used to and 2) Because as long as minorities don’t stray away from the Left’s slave plantations of the mind, they can coexist… not in the same neighborhood, of course. The Left builds walls around their own homes to keep undesirables out. But if minorities stay in the plantations and stay away from the Left’s homes and lives, they are okay with us.
If you really want to see what racism looks like, look at any Democrat. They say they support minorities, but would never dare disrupt their own lives in any way to support minorities. Why else do you think George Clooney left his England estate after the Syrian Refugee crisis? He said it was too unsafe and left for a manor in L.A. that would be away from the refugees. He supports the “refugees” as long as they stay far away from him and his home.
I’m not saying that that’s inherently racist. I’m saying that that’s the mentality of the Left: chaos and calamity is fine as long as it doesn’t affect them.
People in the government were exempt from Obamacare, while the rest of us were forced into getting it or facing a hefty fine. As long as their chaotic policy doesn’t affect them, they are okay with subjecting you to it.
Thus, they are okay with open borders and Syrian “refugees” coming into the country as long as those "filthy mutts" stay out of their lives and stay in their good graces.
At the end of the day, the objective of the Left is to enslave the whole world and place themselves as the kings and queens of the world. Everyone sharing one singular point of view: theirs, and no one who thinks differently is allowed to exist.
Thankfully, I know very well that they will never reach that goal. Taking aside how monumentally improbable and likely impossible it is, God would never allow them to have such power and influence over the world. Or at least not for very long.
We don’t know what kind of world we’ll see in the moments coming up to the Rapture, but it really doesn’t matter at the end of the day. He will have His justice and not a single man or woman on Earth can deny Him that.
But to wrap things up: being racist against white people is still being racist and it’s still disgusting.
“Many are the plans in the mind of a man, but it is the purpose of the Lord that will stand.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
The answer to that question is the exact same answer for the question “what’s so wrong about being a black female?”, which is: absolutely nothing. And yet, the Left is always the one to bring up race and gender in every issue. They always have problems with someone’s skin color.
Earlier this week, President Trump announced the nomination for Justice Anthony Kennedy’s replacement for the Supreme Court. Trump chose D.C. Circuit Court Judge Brett Kavanaugh, a solidly conservative judge who would most likely have a hand in overturning Roe v. Wade if the case is brought up again to the Supreme Court. He just so happens to be a white man. GASP! The horror! How can President Donald Trump select someone who is a member of the majority race in this country?! How could he select yet another white man?!
The thing is that, regardless of who he chose, the Left would have utterly trashed that person, if the Women’s March statement opposing the nomination of judge “XX” is anything to go by. Had it been Barrett (my personal favorite), Trump would’ve been attacked for trying to play the “woman” card and she would’ve been attacked for “betraying women” for being pro-life.
So, with the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh, the Left is attacking him for everything (even saying he will kill millions of people), including for his race and gender. If you’re still wondering if the Left is racist and sexist, there’s your answer.
Supposed comedian Stephen Colbert joked about this whole thing, saying that Kavanaugh fills Trump’s BINGO card for nomination. He literally pulled out a BINGO card that only had “white guy” squares.
Fellow butcher of comedy Jimmy Kimmel joked: “[Trump] narrowed his candidates down to three but, in the end, Brett Kavanaugh was the white guy for the job.”
And it’s not just washed-up comedians who are taking a jab at Kavanaugh’s race. The New York Daily News attacked not only Kavanaugh’s race and gender, but the race and gender of those who support and praise him. “After President Trump picked a man who many believe will be the deciding vote on reversing Roe v. Wade, the White House released a list of praise from 34 members of Congress – all of whom are white men.”
I’ve used this argument before, but I believe it to be effective and relevant, so I will use it again here. Replace the word “white” with the word “black” or “Hispanic” and the word “man” with the word “woman” and you can’t help but notice the racism on display.
To better picture it, I’ll rewrite some of the aforementioned statements and “jokes”.
Picture Stephen Colbert pulling out a BINGO book that only had “black chick” on it. Picture Colbert bashing Trump for choosing a black woman for Supreme Court based only on the fact that the nominee is black and female.
Or how about what Kimmel said? “He narrowed his candidates down to three but, in the end, [Judge XX] was the black woman for the job.” I get he’s using a pun, so this doesn’t have the same effect, but picture Kimmel also attacking the nominee’s race and gender.
Or the NY Daily News: “The White House released a list of praise from 34 members of Congress… all of whom are black women.”
So, again, I ask: what is so wrong with being white and a man? And don’t tell me I’m being a white supremacist sympathizer for defending white men or white people in general. Were people who defended black people before the 60s called “black supremacist sympathizers”? No. And considering it’s white people being attacked for absolutely no reason, of course I’m going to defend them. Same way I would defend black people being attacked for absolutely no reason. Same goes for Hispanics, Asians, Native Americans, Muslims, gay people, transgenders, liberals, conservatives, atheists, Christians, etc.
It’s not right to attack people for no reason. But the most important thing is recognizing just who are the ones attacking people: those who consider themselves “tolerant” and “loving” and “caring”.
The truth is they only tolerate you if you agree with them. The Democrat Party’s slogan for 2018 and 2020 should honestly be: “Join us in tolerating and loving people who are different or die.” Considering their constant (and sometimes violent) attacks against Christians, conservatives and Trump supporters, I’d say that slogan fits them perfectly.
They don’t tolerate others. They HATE others. Anyone who is different, who thinks differently from them, cannot be tolerated. Their speech must be eliminated and censored. And when they set their sights on a particular group of people, they don’t let up.
Historically, the biggest reason the KKK was formed was not simply to attack and kill black people. It was formed to attack and kill Republicans. When Lincoln freed the slaves, black people had no real reason to vote Democrat, considering they were the ones who fought for their “right” to keep them slaves. So, the KKK formed to attack and kill Republicans and black people were usually Republicans.
Today, while not always necessarily the case, white people are sometimes associated with the Republican Party. And unless they denounce the GOP, like the black people who began voting Democrat to keep themselves out of trouble, those white people will be attacked and/or harassed.
Everything the Left does, historically, is fueled by hatred. They hated black people who would vote Republican (don’t misunderstand, they still do). They hate white people who vote Republican, calling them racists. They hate Hispanics who vote Republican, believing them to be abandoning their “brethren” at the border.
Make no mistake, I do not consider a single person who breaks the law to enter the country a “brother” or “sister”. And it also speaks to the Left’s racism to assume all Hispanics disapprove of Trump’s handling of immigration.
It speaks to their racism for them to assume all black people are Democrats. Even more so to assume they MUST vote Democrat.
The truth is that the Left does not tolerate white people who do not denounce their “whiteness” or the GOP. That is why they excuse their prominent Democrats who are white such as Bill and Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren (go ahead and tell me she’s Native American, I could use a laugh), etc. They are excused of their “whiteness” because they support the Leftist agenda. Same reason they excuse Al Gore’s and DiCaprio’s massive carbon footprints. They support the Leftist agenda as well.
Now, in all of this, you really have to ask why they would attack white people. It’s not like they have to fill some quota of being racist towards a group of people every other century. Well, the reason they attack white people is because they see it as an opportunity. An opportunity to garner more votes. You see, despite the Left having been the ones to most strongly support slavery and segregation, they’ve managed to distort history, in their takeover of the education system, to make it seem like it’s not the Left’s fault, but rather, white people in general. And more specifically, America’s fault.
Their arguments and attacks against black people were that they were inferior to the white man. Their arguments and attacks against white people are that their ancestors thought themselves superior to the black man. You see their tricks? It’s them who attacked black people but make it seem as though it was generally white people (and even Republicans) who made those attacks.
And so, they attack white people today for the atrocities of DEMOCRATS’ past. This is deception at its finest. They are making racism seem acceptable again. For what reason? To create more issues of race so they can continue getting elected. If you lived in the Left’s mind, you would believe America is as racist today as it was in the time before the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and before the Emancipation Proclamation.
Race relations in the U.S. can’t be allowed to improve. For Democrats to be elected, people must be divided. They must be divided in terms of race, gender, class, etc. Black people must blame white people for things Democrats committed. Women must believe men are holding them back. The proletariat must believe the bourgeoisie are taking advantage of them.
This is how the Left wins. But the thing is that facts do not support this. White people do not treat black people the same today as in the past. Men don’t have more rights than women do. The working class isn’t being taken advantage of by the rich class.
But this doesn’t matter to the Left. In fact, these things are nothing but a bother to them. They MUST create division. They MUST attack white people to make it seem as though the Democrats have always been on the side of black people.
It’s nothing but a farce.
Regardless, it’s always necessary to point out the Left’s history of racism that continues to this day. They simply can’t help but be racist. It’s in their genes.
“A worthless person, a wicked man, goes about with crooked speech, winks with his eyes, signals with his feet, points with his finger, with perverted heart devises evil, continually sowing discord; therefore calamity will come upon him suddenly; in a moment he will be broken beyond healing.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Starbucks has been under fire lately, seemingly for “racial bias” due to a video showing two black men being arrested at a Philadelphia Starbucks and another story of a black man being denied entry to a restroom. I won’t go into a whole lot of detail about it, just know that, according to the woman who recorded the video, the staff at the shop called the police because the men hadn’t ordered anything while they waited for a friend to arrive and another incident in which a black man needed to use the restroom, having not made a purchase, and was denied entry despite the fact that another man, who was white, also had not made a purchase but was allowed entry.
The first situation is rather strange, as the two black men seemingly were not doing anything wrong, just sitting in the shop and waiting for their friend. I don’t know what warranted the manager to call the police or what warranted the police to arrest the two men. Thankfully, they were both released some hours later, but you really have to wonder what could have been going on there.
According to witnesses, the two men weren’t doing anything.
Due to these two circumstances, Starbucks has been under fire, with the hashtag “#BoycottStarbucks” popping up, prompting Starbucks CEO to do some damage control and conduct a “racial-bias education program”.
Now, I’m not going to defend Starbucks in the least. They are progressive loons and I’ve been doing my own “#BoycottStarbucks” movement for a very long time for different reasons. But it’s very interesting to see a company that has a brand of progressivism seem so racist.
Of course, they’re Leftists, so maybe I shouldn’t be so surprised, but still. Their whole brand is that of “progressives” who are only biased against police and military. They don’t tend to show bias against black people, so it’s very interesting to see this.
But I really should be getting to the bigger reason I’m writing this article. I, for one, don’t really care for Starbucks’ reputation or what people think about them. That’s not the reason I’m writing this article. The reason for this article is that a black man shared a video on Twitter in which he, in essence, took advantage of the scrutiny Starbucks has been getting and managed to convince a barista to give him a free coffee.
The video shows the man telling the barista: “I heard ya’ll was racist, so I came to get my free coffee.”
The barista, who is a white female, responds: “I saw that!”
Prompting the man to say: “I heard you guys don’t like black people, so I came to get my Starbucks reparations voucher.”
The barista then said: “Is that a real thing?” It’s not. “I mean, I’ll give it to you, I saw that on my Twitter last night and I was like, what the f**k!”
The barista then proceeds to make the man the coffee and the man sarcastically said: “That’s what I’m talking about! This is justice.”
Now, there’s nothing malicious about this video or what I’m saying about the man. The man, whom I’ll refer to as Bryan Sharpe, his name, was simply taking advantage of the ignorance of the company and the barista. As a matter of fact, he even commented with: "Black privilege gets me free coffee. I love racism. Only in America." Clearly, all he was doing was trolling the barista.
All he had to do was claim Starbucks is racist and the barista complied, giving him free coffee, which is most likely a violation of company policy, but since this is “reparations” in the barista’s mind, it’s fine.
The barista didn’t want to make it seem as though she was racist herself, and so she complied with Sharpe’s request to get some coffee free of charge. It’s more funny than it is anything else.
But this does highlight how tightly wound the Left is when it comes to racial issues. If they appear to have been racist, even if they weren’t, they will immediately submit and apologize. The ironic part in their efforts to restrict free speech is that they end up restricting their own free speech some times.
I recall a time when Ozzy Osbourne’s daughter, Kelly, was on The View and proceeded to say something that was viewed as racist. This was back during the 2016 election and they were talking about Donald Trump. Kelly Osbourne said: “If you kick every Latino out of this country, then who is going to be cleaning your toilet, Donald Trump?”
Of course, she immediately had to apologize and attempt to rephrase it. Frankly, as a Latino, I found that to be more funny than offensive. Personally, I don’t really get offended if someone attacks my race. If someone refers to me as a Mexican, I’ll correct them since that’s a nationality, not a race, but I won’t get offended.
I’m not petty and shallow enough to be offended by something so silly. Someone could call me a “beaner” and I still wouldn’t care. But the interesting thing is that, Leftists do care about that.
They don’t ever want to offend anyone, unless that person is a Christian, conservative, Trump supporter and Republican, but they don’t want to offend other people. So, they restrict even their own speech.
Now, I’m not saying we should all start saying the N-word, or call gay people the F-word. It’s in pretty bad taste to do something like that. But people shouldn’t be so concerned about “offending” people. Cotton shouldn’t offend black people. A cross shouldn’t offend Atheists. Darwin’s Origin of the Species certainly doesn’t offend me.
The American flag shouldn’t offend people. Kelly Osbourne’s comment shouldn’t offend Latinos. It should be refuted, since she’s making the assumption that Trump wants to deport all Latinos, which is simply not true, but it shouldn’t offend people.
Likewise, the Starbucks barista shouldn’t risk her own job (though this being Starbucks, and given the reasons she gave free coffee to the guy, I don’t think there’s much risk anyway) just to “appease” someone who is very clearly taking advantage of the company’s situation.
Now, I’m not saying there shouldn’t be anything that offends us. Of course, there are legitimate reasons to be offended. I was certainly offended when Joy Behar insulted the Vice President’s Christian beliefs. I was also offended that it took her about a month to apologize.
I was offended at the “art” piece of Jesus Christ in a jar of urine. I’m offended every time NFL players protest the National Anthem. I’m offended every time someone burns the American flag or flies it upside down.
I’m offended every time someone is discriminated against for their Christian or Jewish faith, their conservative views or their support of Trump.
Why? Because these are legitimate reasons to be offended. Cotton is not something to be offended over. No black person today has had to pick cotton under the threat of a white master. No white person today has owned a slave.
The Starbucks barista shouldn’t feel as though she’d commit some sort of hate crime by denying the guy some free coffee. And notice how every time I refer to Sharpe, unless it’s important to take notice, I never refer to him as “the black man”? Just “the man”? That’s because, unless it’s necessary to point it out, I don’t care about the guy’s race. Same goes for the barista. I could’ve referred to her as “the white barista” or “the female barista”, but neither is necessary to point out every single time.
THAT is what real progress looks like. What real EQUALITY looks like. Not looking at someone and referring to them as their race unless it’s absolutely necessary and certainly not taking advantage of my own race to make someone else feel guilty. I don’t care about the guy’s or the barista’s race or gender. But that is all liberals and Leftists can focus on.
If someone didn’t get a job in a company and they tell their liberal friend about it, they might think there’s race discrimination going on.
Remember the Canadian superintendent in the “white privilege” poster? That she claimed that her skin color had given her unfair advantages?
How is that in any way progressive? How is that in any way equalizing? How is a Starbucks barista giving free coffee to a black man “reparations” for at least the incidents surrounding the company?
How are reparations a way to move forward? All they are is an excuse not to try to be successful and asking for things to be given to you, forcing a member of another race to feel guilty for transgressions that had nothing to do with them and had everything to do with the Democrat Party.
The way to move forward isn’t to essentially put white people in the place of black people of the past. That would literally be regression. The way to move forward isn’t also shaming and attacking someone for being white. That’s also regression.
The way to move forward is to study history so that we may never again repeat it.
Alas, I digress. Returning to Sharpe, I’m not trying to call him out for anything. If anything, I’m calling out the fear and ignorance coming from the barista. She seemed like a nice enough kid trying to do the right thing, but she shouldn’t be so worried about appearing racist if she were to say “no”. If there’s a racial problem with Starbucks or its employees, that’s up to the company and the individual employees, not her necessarily.
“For God shows no partiality.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
During a CNN panel talking about the shooting at the high school in Florida, former Democrat presidential candidate Bernie Sanders’ spokeswoman Symone Sanders made the attempt to make this matter not just about gun laws, but also race.
Sanders said: “If the Parkland shooter had been black or brown we wouldn’t be talking about the types of legislation we could or could not make happen. If he was yelling Allahu Akbar, Congress and the President would’ve been tweeting about it and they would’ve swooped in and did whatever they felt needed…”
Other panelists, such as Bill Kristol tried to make the point that no gun law change occurred after the San Bernardino shootings, with Sanders replying that we have a Muslim ban now.
I’ll get to that part momentarily.
First, I wanna focus on the elephant in the room. She said if the Parkland shooter had been black or brown we wouldn’t be talking about types of legislation. Either she’s insanely stupid or hasn’t been paying much attention at all about the shooter.
Ms. Sanders, I’ll put things in words that even someone like you might be able to understand.
The name of the Parkland shooter was Nikolas Cruz. Typically, that name is indicative of Hispanic descendance. Hispanics tend to count as “brown” people. If you look up his picture, you can see that he’s slightly brown. Admittedly, not too brown, but still of a darker shade than a typical white person.
My question to you then is: what in the absolute heck are you talking about? He may not be black, but he surely is brown. He’s Hispanic. And yet, people talking about this subject couldn’t care less about that. Well, everyone except you, seemingly.
That is why I believe she has either not been paying a whole lot of attention or she’s just that stupid.
Now, she did mention that he had trained with a white supremacist group. The thing about that is that it’s not true. Nikolas Cruz didn’t train with a white supremacist group. This particular fake news comes due to a report by the AP that a spokesman from Republic of Florida, a white supremacist group, “confirmed” that Cruz trained with them.
Later on, however, the story was debunked, saying that pictures taken of “Cruz” didn’t confirm his identity (the pictures showed someone concealing their face or a blurry picture) and the spokesman himself eventually said that there are multiple people in their group by the same name or at least variations of it.
So Sanders is either misinformed and spreading fake news or she’s an idiot and spreading fake news.
Now, let’s move on to the Muslim ban part of her short rant.
Do you know why we have a Muslim ban? Why we specifically disallow these particular people from certain Muslim nations from coming here? Because Islam is the only “religion” in the world that has constant problems with terrorism.
Buddhists don’t have a problem with Buddhist terrorists. Why? Because there are no Buddhist terrorists killing in the name of Buddha.
Hindus don’t have a problem with terrorists in their own religion. Why? Because there are no Hindu terrorists killing in the name of Krishna or Ganesh or Vishnu.
Jews don’t have a problem with terrorists in their own religion. Why? Because there are no Jewish terrorists that kill in the name of Yahweh.
Christians don’t have a problem with terrorists in our own religion. Why? Because there are no Christians that kill in the name of Jesus.
But Muslims have a problem with terrorists in their own religion. Why? BECAUSE ALLAH IS THE ONLY DEITY THAT ORDERS HIS FOLLOWERS TO KILL PEOPLE!
On top of that, the Muslim ban doesn’t even affect all of the Muslim nations in the Middle East, only a select few.
Now, I don’t think it’s necessary for me to go into too much more detail on the actual shooting and on why no form of gun control would work. I simply wanted to share this ridiculous statement made by an insane Leftist who clearly has no idea what it is she’s talking about.
To repeat myself, Nikolas Cruz IS brown, yet, Trump and his administration aren’t doing what Sanders would expect them to do about someone who’s brown in this case. In her mind, she’s probably thinking that Cruz would be sent to Guantanamo Bay or get deported if he were black or brown. Well, he’s brown and he’s still in custody. And likely will be sent to prison for life.
The comment she made highlights her raging ignorance on the subject matter and it also highlights the insanity of the Left’s minds. Whenever a Hispanic person is involved in anything, the Left expects Trump to immediately deport that person even if he or she is here legally. That’s how little they think of Trump and that’s how they view things such as illegal immigration.
I won’t get too much into that topic since it has nothing to do with this case, but it does point to the Left’s mentality. They simply can’t help but to think about people’s race. They are just that shallow.
“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and instruction.”
Author: Freddie D. Marinelli.
I recall having ended my last article with a little reminder of who Democrats are: racists. And that extends to being racist against white people. And in case any of you didn’t know: yes, it’s possible to be racist against white people.
While Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. dreamed of a world where his children and his African-American brethren may be judged not on the color of their skin but rather on the content of their character, Chelsea Handler dreams a different dream. A world where people are judged very much so on the color of their skin,
Here’s what the lunatic tweeted: “Happy Martin Luther King day to a true hero. This day means more today than it ever has. We all must honor the spirit of his fairness and equality and tireless search for justice. It is up to white people to honor Dr King, and to think about what it must be like to not be white.”
Chelsea is in the lead for the “single stupidest tweet of 2018” award.
I can just picture Dr. King rolling over in his grave at this racist tweet. Chelsea, it’s not up to white people to honor Dr. King. It’s up to EVERYONE WHO WISHES FOR EQUALITY OF PEOPLE to honor him. His message was against judging people over the color of their skin. A point that Chelsea horrendously misses.
To address the last part of the tweet: I’m Hispanic and I feel pretty white. If being white means having a nice house, a decent job and living comfortably, then I feel pretty white. I don’t feel like a “typical” Hispanic. To Chelsea, a Hispanic typically is cleaning some rich folks’ toilets, mowing the lawn or doing any sort of medial housework for inhumanely low wages.
To Chelsea, a “typical” black person is someone who lives in the ghetto (a concept originated by the Nazis to “ghettoize” the Jews), is part of a gang, is having children at 16 if she chooses to keep the children and lives off of welfare.
To Chelsea, a “typical” Asian person is someone who is good at math, eats rice, is good in school and is an engineer working in Silicon Valley.
If “not being white” means being stereotyped as doing or being anything described above, that’s a horrible statement to make. The way I see things, a Hispanic can “live like a white person” if living like a white person means living in comfort. A black person can live that way. An Asian person can live that way.
You see, the point is that YOUR SKIN COLOR DOESN’T MATTER WHATSOEVER! You’d think I wouldn’t have to say that, but Democrats are so fixated on the color of people’s skin that they don’t care that they’re being the opposite of progressive.
If anyone is thinking backwards, it’s the Democrat Party and its advocates like this moron.
Thankfully, other Twitter users were quick to point out the hypocrisy and outright racism of her statement.
“OUT: I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. IN: White people are bad,” said one user.
“’I have a dream one day that people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.’ When you talk about whiteness, clearly you have failed to see this dream through, Chelsea,” said another user.
And my personal favorite: “Every time I read your posts, I think what it must be like to not be sane.”
I doubt Chelsea has the mental capability of recognizing the racism of her words, so I doubt she will think that these people are right. For that matter, I doubt many Democrats will think these people are right.
So many things that you see today are all about race. Harvard worries about their “diversity” in campus rather than getting the best students they can get. Democrats attack Trump for not “diversifying” his cabinet rather than think he’s getting the best possible candidate at each position that he can find.
The Left calls white people racist on a mere whim even if nothing remotely close to racism is ever said. They believe white people are horrible, should recompense black people with “reparations” and will go as far as to say that white people should die. And I’ll remind you, it’s white Democrats who are typically the ones who hate white people the most, as you can see here.
Chelsea HATES white people, though she’s white herself. But she excuses her whiteness by being “woke”, an honest-to-God idiotic term to support the Black Lives Matter movement (which coincidentally also goes against Dr. King’s wishes). Being “woke” is their excuse for being racist against white people while being white themselves. It’s their excuse for “living like a white person”.
Just as Bernie Sanders is excused for living like a capitalist by preaching socialism. Just like any Democrat is excused for being rich by pushing for higher taxes on the rich. Just like Antifa is excused for using fascist tactics of violence by claiming to be against fascism.
There is no bigger hypocritical entity in the universe than the Democrat Party. No greater racist entity. They were racist against people of color since Andrew Jackson founded the Party and continue to be racist against people to this day. Being racist against white people is just as bad as being racist against black people.
But the Democrat Party is so blinded by their hatred and racism that they fail to see that. They see defending anyone who’s white as being a “white supremacist” and “Nazi”. They don’t understand the meaning of racism.
If you’re against someone simply because of their skin color, that’s racism. If you’re against someone because of anything else, that’s not racism.
The Left would often brand people racist if they were against Obama. If those people were against him because Obama was black, then yes, they were racist. But if they were against Obama because of his policies and ideologies, then that’s not racist. The very fact that they would attack people with that was inherently racist.
All that argument made was that people should support Obama, if for nothing else, because he was black. Anyone who voted for him just because he was black is just as racist as anyone who voted against him just because he was black. Likewise, anyone who voted for Hillary just because she’s a woman is just as sexist as someone who voted against her just because she’s a woman.
I’ve made that point before, but I felt it was necessary to reiterate it since the Left has seemingly gotten dumber since the last time I said that.
So for Chelsea to say something like that exposes her true nature: that of a racist. Being racist isn’t just about discriminating against black people. Anyone who thinks that is, himself, a racist. If someone thinks black people can’t be racist, or Hispanics can’t be racist or any other minority can’t be racist simply because they’re a minority, they themselves are racist.
And that perfectly describes the Left. They make faux claims of not being racist while at the same time showing the world that that’s precisely what they are.
This is why I said racism flows through their veins. They can’t escape it historically. And certainly not ideologically. For all their talks about being “progressive” they are among the world’s most backwards-thinking group of people.
“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”
Author: Freddie Drake Marinelli.
After last week’s reported comments about immigration and bringing people in from “s**thole” countries, the Left and the media have all gone into a frenzy to call Trump a racist. But there are plenty of people who don’t believe what he said was racist or that he is racist in general. And that includes Dr. Alveda King, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr’s niece.
In an interview with Breitbart, Dr. Alveda King said: “I agree that President Trump is not a racist. He has done so much… Just now, [Trump signed] the bill that was sponsored by Congressman John Lewis making the Martin Luther King Jr. historic site in Atlanta a national park – the first park to be named after an African-American man.”
You wouldn’t know about that from watching the fake news media. Had this happened during Obama’s tenure as President, this would be one of the biggest stories out there. “President Obama Signs Historic Bill Into Law, Making MLK Historic Site Into National Park – Marking This To Be The First Park To Be Named After African-American,” is what the headlines would say.
But what do the headlines read today? From CNN: “Why focusing on ‘s**thole* (and no, they didn’t censor it) totally misses the point – Trump’s sentiment toward nations populated by people of color is much more important than his word choice.”
From The Washington Post: “Trump says ‘I’m not a racist,’ accuses Democrats of impeding DACA deal.”
From the New York Times: “Donald Trump’s Racism: The Definitive List.”
All the media outlets are focusing on Trump’s reported remarks. None have mentioned this bill. None have mentioned the falling unemployment rate for Blacks and how it's the lowest since the 1970s, when such a statistic was first recorded. And when it comes to the tax cuts that help everyone, the Left MOCKS the “chump change” businesses like Walmart give their employees.
“In terms of the bonus that corporate America received versus the crumbs that they are giving workers to kind of put the schmooze on is so pathetic. It’s so pathetic," Nancy Pelosi said about businesses giving their employees thousand-dollar bonuses.
Well, I don’t expect someone with a $30 million net worth to value a couple of extra thousand dollars. But to these employees, that’s a MASSIVE bonus. Some are even raising the minimum wage they give their employees to $15 an hour.
THAT is how you raise the minimum wage. Not through forcing it on businesses but through helping businesses grow and the businesses WILLINGLY raising the wages of their employees.
What’s so wrong with corporate America getting a big bonus if it helps a lot of people? What kind of jealous, evil person do you have to be to despise that? Short answer: a Democrat.
Returning to Dr. King, she continues with: “And there’s all other kind of legislation and things that President Trump is passing, including getting a lot of black folks out of jail – he’s working on doing that, believe it or not, and putting them back to work. And putting America back to work – African-Americans especially because our job rate or our hiring rate was so low and it’s going up along with everybody else’s rate. So President Trump is not a racist. He cares about America period. And he said, ‘No matter what color our skin is, we all bleed red.’ So he sees black people, all people as people. He sees Americans as the people he is supposed to serve and he’s doing that. And he is not a racist. I just really want to say that.”
While Obama saw the American people as his subjects, given his “Emperor of America” remarks, Trump sees the American people as his boss. He knows we put him there and he knows what we want to see him do.
Breitbart then went on to write: “King, who has been increasingly active in conservative politics and reportedly voted for Trump in his presidential campaign, backed him up by saying, ‘[Trump] cares about this country. He cares about the plight of everybody who’s been under-served, mis-served, mistreated, and he’s equalizing that. And he means that and I believe him, I really do.’”
As part of being increasingly active in conservative politics, she had been battling Facebook over a pro-life documentary about Roe v. Wade, which Facebook had been “taking it down, not letting the paid ads go forth and all that,” according to Dr. King.
Thankfully, Breitbart informs us that: “Facebook later yielded to pressure and allowed the team to crowdfund.”
I’m certainly happy to hear such good news.
But returning to the topic at hand, it’s truly significant for Dr. Alveda King to back up President Trump when it comes to the claims that he’s racist. Claims which had been made since the very day he announced he would run for President.
Upon his candidacy announcement, Trump talked about Mexicans crossing the border bringing crime, drugs, rapists and all kinds of bad people into the country. Despite being right, the media branded him a racist immediately, though at the time, they weren’t really taking Trump as a serious candidate either. But the point is that they’ve been calling Trump a racist since the day he ANNOUNCED his candidacy.
It didn’t work back then. It didn’t work when he became a serious threat to Hillary (even if they still didn’t think he’d come close to winning). It didn’t work on Election Day. And it hasn’t worked any day they’ve tried.
I think the Left might be running out of plays to use out of their playbook if they’re circling back to racism. Racism which is being heavily rebutted by the very actions he’s partaken and the people behind him, including a Hispanic millennial (yours truly) and Dr. Alveda King.
If you want to find evidence of racism within anyone, search almost anyone within the Democrat Party. Obama was a terrible president for everyone, but even more so for people of his own race.
Dick Durbin is making ridiculous and, frankly, racist claims that the term “chain migration” is racist towards black people because “they came to the country in chains.” Yes, claiming something is racist for a specific race when it’s not is racism in itself.
Responding to Teddy Roosevelt’s dinner with Booker T. Washington in 1901, Democrat Senator James Vardaman said: “I’m just as opposed to Booker T. Washington with all his Anglo-Saxon reinforcements as I am to the coconut-headed, chocolate-colored typical little coon Andy Dotson who blacks my shoes every morning.” Democrat Senator Benjamin Tillman added: “Now that Roosevelt has eaten with that n****r in Washington, we shall have to kill a thousand n****rs to get them back to their place.”
I’m not done.
Democrat Senator Theodore Bilbo during one of FDR’s reelection campaigns, said: “White people will be justified in going to any extreme to keep the n****r from voting. You do it the night before the election. I don’t have to tell you any more than that. Red-blooded men know what I mean.”
Here’s a quote from Democrat Robert Byrd (from when he was a soldier fighting in WWII) about fighting alongside black people: “I am loyal to my country and know but reverence to her flag BUT I shall never submit to fight beneath that banner with a negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times, and see this old glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimens from the wilds.”
It’s not just elected Democrats that have proven to be racists. Early twentieth century Democrat advocates also wrote racist books. Charles Carroll wrote a book titled: “The Negro a Beast” (1900). Robert Shufeldt: “The Negro: A Menace to American Civilization” (1907) as well as: “America’s Greatest Problem: The Negro” (1915). Charles Harvey McCord: “The American Negro as a Dependent, Defective and Delinquent” (1914).
I could go on, but I think I’ve made my point and I don’t want to make this article too long.
To reiterate my point: if you want to find evidence of racism within anyone, search almost anyone within the Democrat Party.
It’s truly a joke for any Democrat to call anyone a racist. Racism, bigotry and hatred courses through their veins.
“The one who conceals hatred has lying lips, and whoever utters slander is a fool.”
Author: Freddie Drake Marinelli.
Is there anything anyone ever does that is inoffensive to someone nowadays? You literally can’t go outside without being called a racist, apparently. And one student from Pitzer College, Malcolm McCann, makes known his beliefs that outdoor clubs in schools are fundamentally racist.
According to Campus Reform: “In a recent op-ed for the school paper, a white Pitzer student frets that the colleges’ outdoor programs, though open to all students and well-funded, are ‘predominantly white spaces’ that deny people of color ‘access to the outdoors.’”
That statement reaches levels of stupidity close to the whole “a banana peel in a tree made people cry” incident a few months back.
McCann writes in his op-ed: “[The Pitzer Outdoor Adventure and ‘On the Loose’ outdoor clubs] claim to be accessible: while trips are open to any student wanting to go, not everyone feels the same ease in entering the outdoors. This discomfort is unfortunately caused by existing racial boundaries.”
I feel as though it’s necessary to remind you that McCann is white himself, so I have no idea how he would know how minorities feel when going outdoors. I’ve been offered to go hiking with some friends before. I turned down those offers not because I felt that my friends would automatically become racists the minute we got there but because I’m not really into hiking.
Likewise, I seriously doubt minorities’ concerns about joining an outdoor club center on how “white” the club is.
Regardless, McCann’s ridiculous sense of social justice is in full display for all to see. He continues his op-ed with: “Historically, white people in imperialist conquests have appropriated land as their own. North America rightfully belongs to indigenous communities, yet it has been taken away from them by force. Consequently, a false sense of ownership of nature permeates white America.”
I just love the way ignorant liberals often phrase things. He writes that the whole country rightfully belongs to indigenous communities, yet, I highly doubt he’d give up his house to some random Indian tribe. He believes the land belongs to the natives, yet he lives and thrives in land that is supposedly not his. Would that not make him a hypocrite?
What land would be his then? Some place in Europe that maybe his family owned before they moved to the colonies? Should he go there since the land his family now owns technically belongs to the natives?
But he’s not done. Not by a longshot. He continues with: “Similarly, the image of a modern outdoor enthusiast is white, as is the historical image of a naturalist. The great icons of nature – John Muir, Walt Whitman, Henry David Thoreau – are all white men. At present, most famous rock climbers are also disproportionately white.”
To which I must reply with: “so what?” What does it matter that those people he named are all white? I can make you a list of the 10 greatest basketball players of all time and I can easily say that only 1 of them is white. Does that mean the NBA is racist because of the disproportionate black to white ratio? OF COURSE NOT!
So why is it racist that there’s a disproportionate white to black ratio in outdoor activities? Often times, these things are about PERSONAL PREFERENCE!
Take me, for example. I’m from Latin America, where soccer (or futbol, as it’s called there) is the most popular sport there (and given the multiple countries with socialist governments, the best chance people have to escape poverty). I like it, but not nearly as passionately as fellow Latin Americans. My favorite sport (in case you couldn’t tell from the numerous references I’ve made over time) is basketball.
A sport that is most famous in 2 places: America and China. Off the top of my head, I can name 2 All-Star Latin American players (one of them retired and the other very close to retirement), so you can see that basketball isn’t nearly as popular for Latin Americans as soccer is. Yet, I love it with a passion.
I don’t care much for outdoor activities not because of the white people there, but because I’m just not into it. I’d rather be shooting some hoops than walking up a mountain carrying a 50 lbs. backpack or kicking a soccer ball.
And if I WERE into outdoor activities, I couldn’t care less about what skin color the other people around me are.
Still, I doubt one minority writer would convince an airhead such as McCann that most people aren’t so fixed about the color of people’s skin. Honestly, for someone to write an op-ed about how outdoor clubs are racist, they really have to be SEARCHING for a problem where none really lies.
And perhaps the funniest point he seriously makes (though that’s up for debate) is that aside from racial barriers, there are also financial barriers… which are also racial barriers, to this guy.
“Many National Parks are hundreds of miles from large cities. Consequently, only those with access to a vehicle and money for gas will be able to enjoy them. Similarly, only students with economic privilege have the resources to attend summer programs that teach wilderness skills.”
Does this guy not realize that he’s talking about COLLEGE CLUBS?! Chances are that the minorities attending such schools have the money to do so. Financial troubles are not something they have to worry about all that much. Granted, a student here and there might say “I can’t afford to go hiking”, which is fair enough. But that’s not a problem every single minority student runs into.
If I were attending college and had the chance to join an outdoor club, I wouldn’t join not because I don’t think I can afford to go to these National Parks but because I’m just not interested in those things.
And even if I WERE interested, my financial ability to go is not something I’d be worried about. Even if I couldn’t afford it, these kind of clubs are usually well-funded. According to Campus Reform: “At Pitzer College, the ‘Pitzer Outdoor Adventure’ club of which McCann is a member began this school year with over $7,500 of funding.”
So even the very club he’s A MEMBER OF is more than capable of funding any student who wishes to participate in the club’s activities. So McCann has exactly zero valid points to make.
Worst of all, not only does he come across as an absolute ignoramus, he’s also coming across as racist. I imagine the reason he wrote the op-ed is because he took one look at his fellow members’ skin tone and felt disgusted at the lack of diversity. He couldn’t get past their skin tone and thus concluded that outdoor clubs are racist and predominantly white.
While the white to black ratio may sway to the white side, that’s by no means a problem. It becomes a problem if the club’s main goal is to attract more minorities rather than focusing on the nature trips. It becomes a problem if the club becomes more focused on the skin color of its members. It becomes a problem if the leader of the school’s club denies entry to a white person wanting to join so that they can have open spots for minorities.
McCann’s op-ed solves no problems and only seeks to incite them. He looked for a problem in his club and decided to create one.
It’s similar to what some people think Congress has. They don’t think there are enough minorities in Congress. They don’t think they have enough women in Congress. Not enough Hispanics or Asians. My big concern isn’t about what a Congressman looks like. My big concern is about what a Congressman BELIEVES! How he works and what he wants done.
I’d happily vote for an African-American woman if she’s a Christian conservative. Same as I would a while man. Or a Hispanic man. Or Hispanic woman. Or Asian man. Or Asian woman.
The point is that I couldn’t care less about the way people look. But it’s clear that the Left does. I can assure you no conservative looks at Congress and thinks “it’s too white and masculine.”
On contraire, I challenge you to find much masculinity, especially from Republicans.
Jokes aside, these are things only the Left worries about. That’s how shallow they are. That’s how shallow they always have been. They’ve always looked at black people as slaves. Either literally or financially. It’s no different today.
They claim they’re not racist, yet they use people’s skin color as an argument. Remember how people called you racist if you didn’t vote for Obama? If the fact Obama was black was the only reason some people voted for him, that makes those people racist.
They portrayed Obama (among other things) as “the cool black guy”… both times. And both times, he ran against a supposedly “racist” candidate just because they were white (I won’t defend either Establishment scumbag, but I remember the way people felt throughout the elections, mostly through 2012).
Race is a major issue for which the Left seemingly "wants" to rectify but never really will. The concept of “white guilt” is entirely created by the Left and entirely ridiculous. It serves no purpose other than to further drive a wedge between people using race.
No white person has to feel guilty about things they had nothing to do with (but Democrats should feel guilty about supporting and fighting for slavery). Likewise, no black person should victimize themselves for things that never happened to them. Cotton shouldn’t be something that offends them. They never had to pick any for their “white masters”.
Still, the Left can’t help themselves. They simply MUST divide people in any way they can. And so, stupid op-ed pieces like these surface. There was no racial problem in Pitzer’s outdoor club, but this guy wants there to be.
“Whoever diligently seeks good seeks favor; but evil comes to him who searches for it.”
Author: Freddie Drake.
Danielle Cross and Freddie Marinelli will bring you the TRUTH that the Left denies you. You'll live a more joyful and victorious life, because the Truth will set you free...