Category Archives: Racism

A Conversation About Race

April 11, 2008 – 8:28 am

Senator Barack Obama wants us to have a conversation about race. Brian Williams is hosting “A Conversation About Race” on MSNBC tonight. Here’s my input.

In one of Obama’s books he writes about the time he spent living with his white grandparents. At one point his grandfather was unemployed and his grandmother was working at a bank. She normally rode the bus to work but one morning asked her husband to drive her to work because a man had accosted her at the bus stop the previous morning. He refused and later told Obama that the reason his grandmother is afraid of the man is because he is black. Obama seemed to favor his lazy, unemployed grandfather in this incident over his grandmother who just wanted to get to work safely. The possibility that his grandmother would have been just as frightened by a white man behaving in the same way seems to have escaped Obama.

If this country is as racist as Obama and his pastor think it is how did he get to where he is from such humble beginnings?

Obama’s wife was an Ivy League educated, successful attorney before they met. How did she achieve that if this country is so racist?

Brian Williams’ program tonight follows a documentary called “Meeting David Wilson.” It is about a black man, David Wilson, who looked up the descendants of his ancestors’ slave masters and found one named David Wilson. I don’t know the complete message of his documentary yet but I can still ask: If this country is so racist how can the black David Wilson get his film on a nationwide cable television program?

If this country is so racist how did General Colin Powell become the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Secretary of State? If this country is so racist how did Condoleezza Rice rise from the Birmingham of the 1960s to become Secretary of State? If this country is so racist how did Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Larry Elder and Star Parker become very successful syndicated columnists? If this country is so racist how did hundreds of other blacks become superstars in entertainment, athletics, politics, communications, etc?

Perhaps a better question is: Are Obama and some other blacks showing a little racism themselves? Do they see themselves as so special that they can’t grasp the possibility that other blacks are capable of succeeding without special government assistance?

By Carson Sasser | Also posted in Race | Comments (9) |

More on the "Jena-Six" Case

September 23, 2007 – 8:37 am

Now the AP is reporting that a white supremacist web site has essentially called for the lynching of the six black kids accused of beating up a white kid in Jena LA. Both Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are calling for state and federal protection of the kids and their families.

I agree that they might need protection now that Jesse and Al have stirred up the hornet’s nest (although one family member said she didn’t feel threatened). No reasonably intelligent adult believes that Al and Jesse didn’t realize beforehand that their over-the-top actions would incite the opposing hate groups. It is exactly what they wanted. And, yes, I consider Jackson’s and Sharpton’s organizations hate groups.

What is unfortunate about this whole thing is the system appeared to be working. Yes, the original charges — of attempted murder — against the black kids seems a bit severe. But only one kid has been tried so far. He was convicted of aggravated second degree battery, not attempted murder. And his conviction has been overturned by a state appeals court. Four of the other kids charges were reduced when they were arraigned several months ago. The sixth kid was booked as a juvenile and his charges are sealed.

I can think of no good reason that Jackson and Sharpton needed to do more than provide good legal representation for the kids and moral and financial support for their families. Holding a press conference in Jena with the family members standing behind them might have been a reasonable thing to do. But bringing in thousands of demonstrators to overwhelm a tiny town was not the kind of help they needed.

Clearly, obtaining justice for the Jena-Six was not Jackson’s and Sharpton’s primary objective.

By Carson Sasser | Also posted in Justice System, Race | Comments (0) |

How Long Will We Tolerate Al Sharpton?

September 20, 2007 – 8:53 am

How much longer will we allow Al Sharpton to intimidate officials around the country? Sharpton doesn’t seem to be concerned about guilt or innocence; to him, charging any black with a crime is unfair. He wants to force an O.J. outcome to any trial involving black on white crime.

CBS News has a report on the march planned for today in Jena, Louisianna:

With as many as 50,000 demonstrators expected here by the busload from across the country, businesses, schools, even government office buildings in this small, central Louisiana town will remain closed all day, reported (CBS News Correspondent Byron) Pitts.

The Reverend Al Sharpton helped organize the march in support of six black teenagers jailed and charged in the beating of a white classmate last December. Five are charged with attempted second-degree murder. The sixth defendant’s case is under court seal because he’s a juvenile.

Sharpton told The Early Show that the case against the six black high school students is a “raw disparity of justice.”

“We didn’t bring race in it,” Sharpton told CBS News. “Those that hung the nooses brought race in it.”

The nooses that Sharpton refers to were hung in a tree at the high school by three white students months before the beating. The students were briefly suspended from school.

There seems to be no evidence that the black teenagers are being treated more severely than anyone else charged with the same crime. The best I can tell, Sharpton believes that their crimes should be excused because someone hung some nooses in a tree several months before the crimes were committed. He clearly intends more than just bringing attention to the black teenagers’ cases. Bringing 50,000 demonstrators to a town of 3,500 is meant to intimidate local and state officials. (Why the state officials are allowing this to happen is another good question.)

Sharpton’s mission is to fan the flames of racial conflict around the country to extend his wealth and power. Has he ever stood up for a black charged with a crime against another black? I don’t have to ask if he has ever stood up for a white charged with a crime against a black.

Update: I learned a little more of the circumstances of the Jena situation. It seems there was enough blame to go around, but the authorities came down harder on the black kids. I still don’t think the state should have allowed Sharpton to bring in hordes of people to cause even more trouble. I think the local officials would have eventually sorted it all out fairly. Do you believe for one minute that, say, New York would allow some white supremacist to bring in thousands of people to protest the prosecution of white kids for assaulting a black kid?

By Carson Sasser | Also posted in Race | Comments (1) |

This and That - Part 9

July 6, 2007 – 10:42 am

First, jounalists started using ‘lead’ when they mean ‘led’. Now they’re using ‘plead’ when they mean ‘pled’. I suppose they think that because ‘read’ is both the present and past tense of the act of grasping the meaning of printed text, then ‘lead’ and ‘plead’ must also represent both forms. It’s as if they think the English language has an ounce of consistency. If so they should consider the fact that ‘pleaded’ can be substituted for ‘pled’, but ‘leaded’ can’t be substituted for ‘led’. ‘Leaded’ means that a substance contains some of the metal element ‘lead’ — which is pronounced ‘led’.
_______________

It’s amusing to me how political factions grab labels to help promote their ideologies. A few years ago big-government liberals started calling themselves ‘progressives’. Who can be against progress? Well, that should depend on what the faction is progressing toward. A faction promoting the subjugation of our people to a monarchy could be considered ‘progressive’ by those that support that goal. The big-government liberals took a generic term and tried to redefine it as if it only applies to their goals. The principal function of such labels is to disguise the goals of the factions.
_______________

I’ve said before that I think racial preferences, such as those implemented in the name of diversity, are themselves racist — because they inherently assume that any member of a minority race is more like other members of that minority race than members of a majority race. They don’t allow for the fact that a child of a white, rural, redneck family in the South would add more diversity to an Ivy League university than a child of a black, urban lawyer from the North. George Will addressed this today in the best and most colorful way I’ve seen:

Although progressive people would never stoop to racial stereotyping, they evidently believe that any black or other minority child, however young, or from whatever social background, makes a predictable and distinctive — you might say stereotypical — contribution to “diversity.”

(Diversity) allows white majorities to feel noble while treating blacks and certain other minorities as seasoning — a sort of human oregano — to be sprinkled across a student body to make the majority’s educational experience more flavorful.

By Carson Sasser | Also posted in Politics | Comments (1) |

On Don Imus and Race Hustlers

April 12, 2007 – 12:35 pm

I’m no great fan of Don Imus or his show. But I do occasionally watch a few minutes of it for much the same reason that I watch Donald Trump’s show: clowns can be entertaining.

How anyone can take seriously anything that Imus says is beyond my comprehension. His show has always been about disparaging people. He routinely has friendly conversations with politicians and reporters on the phone and then insults them after they hang up. Calling members of the Rutgers women’s basketball team “nappy-headed hos” was a stupid thing to do, but doing and saying stupid things is his trademark. What made this stupid remark different is that the race hustlers were apparently short on ambulances to chase. Sharpton and Jackson jumped on it like buzzards on road-kill.

The term that Imus used comes from blacks. It is indiscriminately used by rappers to refer to black women in general. The only difference that I can see between Imus and rappers is that Imus applied the term to a specific group of women that he had no reason to believe are whores. The idea that it is alright for blacks, but not whites, to use terms like “nappy-headed hos” and “niggas” is absurd.

The concept of an exclusive “black community” that I’ve heard mentioned a lot this week is more racist to me than Imus’ stupid remark. On one talk show black guests insisted that problems like Imus’ remark had to be handled by the black community and that whites should stay out of it. Imagine the outcry if a white person suggested that blacks should move aside and let us white folks deal with our problems. Further, how does this black community alone expect to deal with a problem that obviously involves whites? Clearly, what the black guests really meant is that they don’t want any dissent from whites, just acquiescence.

The best way to handle an incident like this is to let the free market decide. Instances of forced viewing of radio and television shows are rare. The only time I listen to rap music is when I hear it from a car next to me at a traffic light. Most individuals are free to tune in or not to tune in. If you don’t like what is being said or shown just don’t listen or watch. Choose another program or read a book. If you don’t like the music don’t buy the CD. If enough people don’t listen or watch the show will eventually go away. If enough people don’t buy the CDs the music will go away.

Of course the corporation airing the show and its sponsors are free to make market decisions too. In this case MSNBC and the sponsors have chosen to cancel the television show. I would have preferred that they wait and let the viewers decide but it is their decision to make. I hope their decision was market based and not just caving to the race extortionists.

By Carson Sasser | Also posted in Free Speech | Comments (0) |

Another Thought on Barack Obama

December 26, 2006 – 10:22 pm

I’ve already said that I’m not ready for a man named Barack Hussein Obama to be President of the United States. That’s because I don’t think he is American enough; it’s not because he is considered a black man. His father was born and spent most of his life in Africa. Barack spent his formative years in Indonesia. Aside from all that, his liberal views and record are reason enough for me not to vote for him.

But that is not what this post is about. It occurred to me that the Obama phenomenon is strong evidence that racism is not as prevalent in America as the race industry claims. How could he generate the interest and poll numbers that are being reported if racism is such a huge problem? Obviously large numbers of non-blacks are indicating their support for him.

I wonder if the race industry is getting concerned. Perhaps they should worry that a black man named Barack Hussein Obama getting elected President of the United States might hurt their business.

On second thought the Obama phenomenon may not say anything at all about the lack of racism in America. It might just indicate how fearful some Americans are that Hillary Clinton could become President if no dramatic alternative is produced.

By Carson Sasser | Also posted in Politics | Comments (0) |

Diversity is Racism

November 16, 2006 – 11:57 am

Jonah Goldberg has a great column at Townhall.com addressing diversity and affirmative action programs at universities. I’ve expressed my feelings about promoting or ‘celebrating’ diversity in a previous post. I’ve also linked to columns by Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell on the subject. You can view these posts here.

From Goldberg’s column:

When the University of Michigan’s admissions policies were being reviewed by the Supreme Court, former school president Lee Bollinger explained that diversity was “as essential as the study of the Middle Ages, of international politics and of Shakespeare” because exposure to people of different hues lies at the core of the educational experience.

This is the problem I have with diversity programs: They assume that students at Yale benefit more from being exposed to a child of a black physician living in Connecticut than being exposed to a child of a white farmer living in Mississippi. In this sense diversity programs are racist. There are plenty of potential black students that are more like the majority of white Yale students than many potential white students.

If universities were really interested in building a diverse student body they would recruit students from across the country and from different socio-economic backgrounds — regardless of skin color.

Update: Jennifer Gratz, a young white woman who was denied admission as an undergraduate at the University of Michigan, sued the university on the basis that the undergraduate college had unconstitutionally awarded other applicants a set number of points solely for not being white. The Supreme Court of the United States ruled in her favor. OpinionJournal, in an article by John Fund, reports that:

She believes universities could look to socioeconomic factors rather than racial ones when considering applicants. Economic elements “should be taken into account, regardless of your skin color.” (emphasis mine)

Obviously she is wise beyond her years — since she thinks like me.

By Carson Sasser | Also posted in Diversity | Comments (1) |