Black Lives Matter; The Cerebral Warlords of Our Time

The cops don't see it that way:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/obama-war-on-cops-police-advocacy-group-225291

http://dailysignal.com/2016/07/12/as-obama-speaks-in-dallas-police-groups-question-his-support/

 

Good grief. I can only hope my sarcasm meter is broken because nobody could actually believe that statement.

 

Obama rides the balance carefully. He does make the obligatory condemnation of violence, because he can't afford alienate white moderates. However, what pisses off some in law enforcement is that he also lends legitimacy to the narrative that the police target and shoot blacks for racial reasons. I think they view that the same way feminists view it when a guy comments on a rape case and says it's always wrong for a guy to rape a girl but then says she was sorta asking for it by being drunk and dressed like a skank.

Nevertheless, this is a losing battle for Trump. Voting Democratic has become part of the black cultural identity. It isn't about issues anymore and hasn't been for a long time. It's much deeper than that, and a guy who's as atrocious of a political advocate as Trump is has no chance of breaking that or even making a dent in it. Even a good political advocate isn't going to shift black voters from the Democrats to the GOP in large numbers. The most one could hope to do is shift the vote a few points, keep from frightening black voters to turn out in unusually big numbers to vote Democratic, and to keep white people who don't want to think of themselves as racists to from feeling too guilty to vote Republican. Short of walking around dropping N-bombs, Trump's smack-talking, rich white dude persona is about the last thing the GOP needs when it comes to the black vote.

 

I actually see the black vote becoming more and more like acceptance of gay marriage. You are starting to see more and more blacks openly stating that the democrats take them for granted. As well, the standard "Uncle Tom" label isn't sticking like it used to. By no means is it a movement, but it is coming.

Joe Madison on Urban Viewgot multiple callers expressing dissatisfaction with the Democrats. Of course, he called them stupid and hung up on them. One day, a significant number of blacks will vote for opportunity versus handouts. It will transform how both parties treat them.

 

It's not hard to find blacks who are dissatisfied with the Democratic Party. I think many of them know that they've gotten very, very little in return for giving them almost unanimous support for the last 50 years. However, there's a very big difference between dissatisfaction with your party and considering the other party. Blacks might not be giddy about voting Democratic, but they think the GOP would have them hanging from trees or picking cotton. If you hate the other party and think they're dangerous, you're not going to consider voting for them even if you don't like your own party that much.

It's similar to how the Tea Party views the GOP. They may be pissed off at the GOP at times, but they think the Democratic Party is the Devil. Not only are they not going to vote for them, they're not even going to listen to them. For example, they were pissed at John Cornyn back in 2014 and some voted for Steve Stockman and Dwayne Stovall in the primary, but how many of them voted for David Alameel in the general election? You could probably count them on one hand.

For them to actually start leaving the Democrats in meaningful numbers, they need to start liking the GOP more or at least hating them less.

I don't think it's as simple as voting for opportunity over handouts. I honestly don't think their decision is that deep. I think it's cultural at this point. Most blacks don't know any blacks who vote Republican (or at least admit to doing so), and when they see a black person who does admit to voting Republican, he gets demonized as a self-loathing traitor. Furthermore, keep in mind that the idea of keeping religion, business, and politics separate is a white thing. Blacks don't do that. Their churches and even black-owned businesses are extremely politically active and are often tools of political advocacy and almost universally for the Democrats. Combine all that with the normal liberal advocacy that everybody gets in public schools and in the media and popular culture, and you're looking at a very tall order to break the monopoly.

Accordingly, to break the monopoly, you'd have to dramatically overhaul the culture - families, churches, and businesses and overcome the public education and media biases. That's a tall order.

 

I'm interested to hear what the GOP has done (or is doing) to promote opportunity for blacks.

I don't think the Democrats do a good job of this either, for the record. But at least Democrats will hold true to "no cuts to Medicaid, no cuts to CHiP, etc." party line forever. Over one-quarter of African Americans live below the poverty line, so I'm guessing "tax cuts" isn't going to move the needle much. Hence, the visible signs of "handouts" take a higher priority.

Honestly, I think one of the biggest things keeping black people from switching to the other line (beyond the well-reasoned comments by Deez) is the use of the term "opportunity" by politicians. For many, many black people, there really isn't a glimpse of opportunity in their neighborhoods. I think schools and nonprofits try a lot of programs to show that little sliver of opportunity to children, but once those kids get to a certain age, the programs dry up.

 

Republicans have sponsored the Economic Freedom Act, SKILL act, LEAP act, and Sea Jobs act to name a few. They also support school vouchers to allow citizens to escape poorly performing schools. Of course, opportunity only works with personal accountability to take advantage of the opportunity.

I think Republicans can do more, but they are more likely to act upon demands from people who vote for them. As long as blacks overwhelmingly vote democrat, they will continue to be largely ignored by both parties.

 

The issue is that they do not - nor will they ever - be credited with it. Do you see a lot of democrats running around in minority areas touting "bi-partisan results?" Of course not - because it's counterproductive to the narrative they're trying to paint. Any positives will be seen as "in spite of" accomplishments, regardless of the facts.

To Deez's point, we're in a society where it's not enough to disagree. That opponent has to be evil and determined to harm you personally. That's what the Dems have been able to do concerning the minority population and the GOP. Granted, the GOP doesn't help the cause on occasions. But since anything they say will be spun, I'm not sure it's worth the effort to try and hone the message so finely that you don't actually say anything.

 

What in the EFA is aimed at blacks? It's all about cap gains tax cuts, eliminating the death tax, etc. Is it implying that jobs will trickle down to the black people eventually?

SKILL and LEAP are bipartisan, so I don't really see those as reasons why someone would switch parties. Maybe the parties see them differently (like Cory Booker or whatever), but they have the same basic goal.

Not sure how SEA Jobs would affect black people at all... oil/gas education wouldn't be aimed at a specific sector of people.

As for vouchers, I think we'll see limited-basis implementation of them on a state and local level, but there's never going to be a perfect way to help all black children acquire a better education. No one is certain what the net benefit would be to taking money away from public education, as it's probably going to harm those who are still involved in it.

 

Well you admit they are doing something, even if you believe it is bi-partisan in some cases? Additionally, I would hope in 2016 our nation's elected officials would be legislating for the good of ALL people.

Insanity is defined as doing the sme thing over and over, but expecting different results. African American participation in the workforce is at an all-time low, despite 8 years of Obama. For those participating, unemployment is at more than double the average of non-AA.

I have heard liberals counter with, "well the Republicans have not done anything either." Well, maybe if AA's leverage their voting power they would. Also, maybe democrats would stop just giving AA's a few more handouts and actually promote something that allows them to climb out of their circumstances in order to earn and keep their votes?

 

If the blacks demand that the GOP out-do the Dems on handouts before they will even think about supporting them with votes, then that is a non-starter.

The biggest thing the GOP, or at least the GOP POTUS candidate, is doing for blacks is to oppose illegal immigration. If blacks cannot see that this is to make more jobs available FOR THEM, then we probably cannot reach them. So long as they listen to the MSM and the Democrat party as far as what is good for them, and do not think for themselves, then we are sunk.

 

This is part of the problem on the leadership crisis. Who wants to lead people in this time anymore? Any good person is going to get ripped to shreds, even if they do nothing wrong. This is not limited to America. Looks at this story in Australia today.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-37127985

Australian Prime Minister hands a homeless guy $5. A bunch of people get angry he did not hand the man more. Another group of people get angry he handed the man anything at all. If any person decides to be generous, that is their decision and the amount of their generosity is their decision. Good for them. I am sure the homeless guy is happy to receive anything. However, now a bunch of people have to get angry about it.

Add to that the fact that Trump has brought political rhetoric down... and we will probably get the leadership we deserve (aka more Trump/Hillary, less compromise) for many years to come.

 

In this case, the officer even gave the guy a chance to drop the gun before opening fire.

Not knowing much about this situation since my entire knowledge of Olympic Swimming is "Phelps and Ledecky are really good", but obviously we all know biology that swimming at a world championship level just a few months after a child is born is much more of a challenge for the mother than the father. I don't think there's anything wrong with acknowledging that that's an impressive achievement above and above how impressive it is to swim that well in and of itself. Now again, I don't know all the details, so maybe a lot more was going on there.

I agree, but there is something wrong with "If you live in the district of a ****** school, and you can't afford private education, then tough, that's the only option you have - unless you move somewhere you probably can't afford and possibly have to switch jobs because of the distance." If it were the right and not the left who was primarily in the anti-voucher camp, then that entire point of view would be considered racist.

 

Some problems with these proposals. First, very few people know about them. Second, most of them give very substantial and tangible benefits to wealthy white people but give small and sometimes only indirect benefit to blacks. That argument isn't necessarily persuasive to me, but to a black person who's hostile and very suspicious of anything a Reputablican does, that argument is going to work. It's certainly enough to divert their attention away from learning about the proposals and going back to just hating Whitey's political party.

One notable exception is vouchers. However, that has some political problems as well. First, as crappy as their schools are, blacks tend to be favorable to teacher unions, especially in areas where many of the local teachers and union leaders are black, and we know how teacher unions feel about vouchers. Blacks largely buy the union's and the Democrat's ******** arguments on vouchers and never think to call them into question or study the issue in any serious depth. Furthermore, Republicans are poor voucher advocates as they are poor advocates in general.

Second, vouchers are largely a state and local issue. That makes it tough for Republicans to take advantage of it at a national level.

Third, significant numbers of Republicans oppose vouchers, so it's hard to coordinate much of a message in it. Anti-voucher Republicans fall into two camps. Some hardcore social conservatives oppose them, because they think they will lead to private and religious schools becoming reliant on and therefore beholden to government for money. The other group is Republicans who represent rural areas. Why don't rural Republicans like vouchers? Because they think vouchers will cost the public education system money and lead to layoffs. When the school district employs a large percentage of the local population, as it frequently does in rural areas, that's a big problem. The GOP has controlled all of Texas government since 2003, but Texas doesn't have a voucher program. Furthermore, nobody thinks they'll ever get one. That should tell you something.

It's worth it to hone the message for three reasons. First, you might convince some black voters. Democrats rely heavily on getting almost unanimous black support. If the GOP can weaken that even a few points, it makes a significant difference.

Second, this will sound cynical, but if you hone the message, you may not attract many black votes, but you might make them fear the GOP less, which will make them less motivated vote. The Democrats' biggest weapon for black turnout isn't a positive agenda for blacks. It's fear of the GOP.

Third, honing the message improves the GOP brand among politically correct white moderates. Plenty of white people who aren't very liberal vote Democratic because they follow the mainstream media and think of the GOP as racist and think that if they vote GOP, it'll make them supportive of racism. If the GOP can create a meaningful outreach to black voters, some of these voters will feel more comfortable with the GOP - enough to at least listen to them.

That's a phony narrative. Most voucher proposals leave a significant amount of the per-pupil funding with the public school to cover fixed costs. In other words, their per-pupil funding is actually increasing. The school district and teacher union opposition to vouchers is 100 percent self-serving. Like any other monopoly, they don't want to have to compete for money, power, and influence that they now get just for existing. That is the only real reason they oppose them.

I'm not one of these people who blames the schools for the kids not performing. That problem is largely because of crappy parenting. However, the handful of parents in those areas who don't want their kids being educated (or not educated) in that environment and actually give a crap should have a choice. It's indefensible not to give it to them just to protect a government monopoly.

In other words, if Democrats weren't beholden to teacher unions (one of the few types of unions Democrats haven't screwed), it would be racist.

 

Yikes. Whomever put that graphic together hasn't even listened to the BLM movement. Are they really saying "don't kill us whitey"? Is that what the right thinks?

 

Reading comprehension was never your strong suit, was it?

 

Why the personal attack? Don't you always claim the weakness of an argument is on display when you have to resort to personal attacks?

 

OK, that was mean, sorry
Now answer the question

 

He wasn't appealing to black people, whose support for him will remain well below 10 percent. He was trying to sound more appealing to educated suburbanites who sympathetic to black people, but know as little about their daily lives as Trump.

 

To be fair, that's the most any Republican nominee can do. Absent a massive cultural upheaval in the black community, there's nothing a Republican could do nor any position a Republican could take that could attract a substantial number of black voters.

 

Crock,

This article by S.E. Cupp offers a good discussion about the politics of the GOP appealing to black voters. Like me, she's hostile to Trump, but that's really not the point. Any Republican who makes a pitch to black voters gets crapped on by the Democrats and the media for trying, and if they don't try, they get crapped on for not caring about blacks. They can't win.

And of course, I can't comment on S.E. Cupp without reminding people of how smokin' hot she is.

 

What question? Sorry, I've been told my reading comprehension skills aren't strong.

 

Charlotte area reporter

 

Protesting and looting are now synonymous

 

Joe Joe Joe
Do not be racist. Heed the words of that Baltimore mayor who declared that we need to give " those who wish to destroy space to do that as well.”
if innocent people get harmed in the process, too bad.

One thing I have never understood. It seems to these 'peaceful protestors" being a cop trumps being black so even though it was a black coop who shot the black man with the gun the cops are the problem.

 

The black cops in those cases are Uncle Toms in the eyes of the race baiters.

 

Looks like a wide divide in this general area

 

It would be tempting to put it in drive and run over whoever is putting her in fear for her life.

 

This has gotten way out of hand. The BLM is a hate group. No doubt about that. They are claiming the police are out to kill them. Even though a high 99.99% are blacks that were in the process of breaking the law or putting everyone in danger by not following orders when confronted by police. They have a choice to follow directions and live or refuse and put their life in danger. It's that simple. If you really think about what they are protesting, it's not blacks getting killed or they'd have a lot more to protest against each other in Chicago. No they are protest for "less law and order."