On Barack Obama and violent crime, Michael Ramirez nails it. After all, if someone is breaking into your house in the middle of the night, do you call a community organizer?
Actually, if someone is breaking into your house, you might not want to wait until help arrives in any form. The National Rifle Association, America’s largest and most successful civil rights organization, reminds us of this:
The NRA political video: https://youtu.be/Gb79Sq5BVj0
But that doesn’t
detract from the point: law enforcement is the principal bulwark between us and
barbarism, and half of America’s politicians are on the other side.
____________________
The New York Times and the Left Have Blood on Their Hands
It was very appropriate that on Friday, the day after the massacre of five Dallas police officers, The New York Times devoted nearly the whole top half of its front page to four enormous photos of the death of Philando Castile, a black motorist killed by a Minnesota police officer.
Of course, the paper
was printed prior to the Dallas murders; and even The New York Times might not
have so prominently featured the Minnesota killing on its front page had the
Dallas murders occurred a few hours earlier.
Nevertheless, it was
completely appropriate. The New York Times has been in the forefront of the
left's hysterical, hate-filled attacks on police officers and whites.
Also appropriately,
on the day of the Dallas murders, the Times published two white-hating,
police-hating pieces.
One was by Michael
Eric Dyson, a radical black professor of sociology at Georgetown University. The Dyson column is nothing more than a
racist hit piece on "white America."
"At birth,
(whites) are given a pair of binoculars ... Those binoculars are privilege;
they are status, regardless of your class. In fact the greatest privilege that
exists is for white folk to get stopped by a cop and not end up dead when the
encounter is over."
Dyson wrote these
words based on the police killings of two blacks last week, about which he
knows nothing except the narrative of the (left-wing) media and what he has
seen on some grainy phone videos.
And not once does Professor
Dyson mention that the Minnesota police officer was Latino. Why would he? That
would suggest that Latinos, too, are given racist binoculars at birth. But
Dyson would never say so, because it is white America he loathes.
Nor does he note, or
perhaps even know -- because of his left-wing binoculars -- facts such as
these:
In
2015, of the 990 people shot dead by police, 93 were unarmed and 38 of them
were black.
Of the 505 people shot dead by police thus far in 2016, 37 were unarmed and of them
13 were black. Given that blacks murder and rob more than whites -- they
committed 62 percent of robberies, 57 percent of murders and 45 percent of
assaults in the 75 biggest counties in the country in 2009 (despite
comprising about 15 percent of the population in these counties) -- an
unarmed black is less likely to be killed by police than an unarmed
white. (Data from the Washington Post.)
Does Dyson, a
professor of sociology, not know these statistics? Does he not know that,
statistically, whites have more reason to fear being murdered by a black than
vice versa? If he doesn't, he shouldn't be teaching sociology. If he does,
students should be aware that he is a left-wing, black nationalist
propagandist, not a teacher.
The same day the
Times published Dyson's piece, it published a second anti-white, anti-cop,
hate-America piece by the mother of Michael Brown, the young black man
killed in Ferguson, Missouri. That black grand jurors and even Obama's
Department of Justice found the policeman who killed Brown was acting in
self-defense after being attacked and thus justified him in doing so means
nothing to The New York Times. So it published the grieving mother's anti-cop
hate.
The blacks and whites
of the left have led much of America, especially black America, to believe that
cops are generally racist, that there is "systemic" racism and that
whites are privileged and racist. It's all a lie that has had -- and will
continue to have -- murderous consequences.
America has become
the least racist multiracial, multiethnic country in world history. This drives
the America-hating left crazy. That's why leftists manufacture fantasies
like "microaggressions" -- non-racist statements that the left labels
racist, foolishness like "white privilege" and the dangerous rhetoric
of "Blacks Lives Matter."
Just yesterday The
New York Times published the results of a study conducted by a black Harvard
professor of economics that shows that "when it comes to the most lethal
form of force -- police shootings -- the study finds no
racial bias."
"It is the most
surprising result of my career," said Roland G. Fryer Jr., the author of
the study.
One assumes that this
Harvard professor has never read Heather Mac Donald or any other conservatives
who have been writing this for years.
Hume: Obama Sees Things Through The Eyes Of An Aggrieved Black Activist Rather Than Of A President
By Ian Schwartz
The video is at this link and the text is below: https://youtu.be/r3BiaGKClpQ
Brit Hume comments on
President Obama's sympathy for the Black Lives Matter movement:
BRIT HUME: In Dallas, Tuesday, President
Obama will be trying to calm racial tensions that his own behavior has done
much to aggravate. From his denunciation of the Cambridge, Massachusetts,
police as acting, quote, stupidly in the arrest of law professor Henry Louis
Gates, to his assertion that the motives of the Dallas cop killer are
unclear, they aren't.
The president has consistently chosen to see things through the eyes of an aggrieved black activist rather than of a president of all the people. He's not failed to speak out whenever a black is killed by a white police officer, but has said next to nothing about the continued slaughters of blacks by other blacks in the streets of Chicago, Baltimore, and other cities.
He has made his sympathy for the Black Lives Matter movement obvious and never mind that the whole premise of the movement seems to be fallacious. No case has given the movement more impetus than the false claim that Michael Brown was shot down in cold blood while trying to surrender to a cop in Ferguson, Missouri two years ago.
And now a study led by a black Harvard law professor has examined 15 years of crime data from 5 major cities and 2 counties. The study found that while police were more often likely to get physical with black suspects than with white ones, when it came to police shootings, there was no racial bias. Did you hear that, Mr. President? No racial bias.
The president has consistently chosen to see things through the eyes of an aggrieved black activist rather than of a president of all the people. He's not failed to speak out whenever a black is killed by a white police officer, but has said next to nothing about the continued slaughters of blacks by other blacks in the streets of Chicago, Baltimore, and other cities.
He has made his sympathy for the Black Lives Matter movement obvious and never mind that the whole premise of the movement seems to be fallacious. No case has given the movement more impetus than the false claim that Michael Brown was shot down in cold blood while trying to surrender to a cop in Ferguson, Missouri two years ago.
And now a study led by a black Harvard law professor has examined 15 years of crime data from 5 major cities and 2 counties. The study found that while police were more often likely to get physical with black suspects than with white ones, when it came to police shootings, there was no racial bias. Did you hear that, Mr. President? No racial bias.
The Wall Street Journal
Opinion
Commentary
Healing After Dallas, Without Obama
When the president repeatedly assumes the worst about police, he sends a dangerous message.
By
Jason L. Riley
President Obama is
scheduled to speak in Dallas Tuesday at a memorial service for the five police
officers gunned down last week—but haven’t we already heard enough from him?
Mr. Obama’s initial
response to the shootings was more of the same: equivocation mixed with an
attempt to change the subject. He said there is no possible justification for
violence against law enforcement, but then added a line about racial
disparities in the criminal-justice system and finished with a nod to more gun
control. “When people are armed with powerful weapons,” said the president, “it
unfortunately makes attacks like these more deadly.”
Time and again during
his presidency, in matters large and small, Mr. Obama has assumed the worst
about police. Officers in Massachusetts, he told us months into his first
term, “acted stupidly” when they responded to a 911 call about a possible
burglary and arrested the black suspect for disorderly conduct.
The 2014 police
shooting of Michael Brown, who attacked a cop after robbing a store in
Ferguson, Mo., led to a Justice Department report criticizing the racial makeup
of Ferguson’s police department and municipal workers, and concluding, without
any evidence, that it is “critically important” for law enforcement “to strive
for broad diversity among officers and civilian staff.”
After the Baltimore
riots last year that followed the death in police custody of Freddie Gray, Mr.
Obama once again condemned the lawbreakers, but not without adding: “We have
seen too many instances of what appears to be police officers interacting with
individuals, primarily African-American, often poor, in ways that raise
troubling questions.” That’s trying to have it both ways.
Like others on the
political left, Mr. Obama has made a habit of minimizing or ignoring the high
black crime rates that obviously underlie tensions between poor minority
communities and cops. More than 95% of black shooting
deaths don’t involve the police, which would seem to undercut the
notion that trigger-happy cops are hunting black men. Sadly, rates of murder,
rape, robbery, assault and other violent crimes are
7 to 10 times higher among blacks than among whites, but liberals
who don’t want to alienate black voters go to great lengths to explain away
this behavior and focus instead on police conduct.
Yes, Mr. Obama has
denounced what happened in Dallas, but he has also been winking at a Black
Lives Matter movement that has spent the past two years holding rallies
that call for (and sometimes feature) violence against cops. Like the
president, these protesters maintain that the police are motivated by racial
prejudice, not by the behavior of suspects. They insist that a biased
criminal-justice system explains the black crime rate, not antisocial behavior.
By indulging this narrative, Mr. Obama and his fans in the liberal media
were playing with fire, and the Dallas carnage was the result.
Just last week, after
the police shootings in Louisiana and Minnesota that sparked the Dallas
protests, the Washington Post ran a long feature sympathetic to the left’s
racist-cops narrative. The story offered a detailed breakdown of police
shootings by race, but nowhere did it offer a racial breakdown of criminal
behavior. By focusing on one and ignoring the other, the paper showed that
it is most interested in pushing a political agenda.
The Dallas shootings
have liberals requesting more national conversations about race. But these
calls are mostly disingenuous. What liberals have in mind is more of a
lecture, where they do the talking and everyone else nods in agreement. The
left wants America to acknowledge that white racism explains black pathology;
that the racial makeup of police departments and elected officials is crucial
to good relations between law enforcement and black communities; and that
reducing gun ownership will reduce gun violence.
In fact, America’s
ghettos had lower levels of black crime and violence in the pre-1960s era,
before major civil-rights legislation had even passed and in an era when racial
discrimination was legal and more widespread. The racial makeup of the Ferguson
police department may not have reflected that of the city, but the same cannot
be said of other locales—Chicago, New York, Baltimore—where relations between
police and black civilians are also strained despite the presence of black
police chiefs, beat cops, prosecutors, judges, mayors and municipal workers. Dallas’s
population is about 25% black, as is the police force, yet murders in the city
were up by more than 70% in the first part of this year, according to the
Dallas Morning News.
And if gun ownership
rates drive gun violence, how do you explain the fact that rural areas of the country,
where people own firearms at twice the rate of their urban counterparts, are
significantly less violent?
Some good may yet
come out of this Dallas tragedy if political leaders and the press stop
treating Black Lives Matter like it’s the NAACP circa 1955. But don’t count
on Mr. Obama to lead that effort.
