Tuesday, July 16, 2013

Their Constitutional Rights Violated By Authorities

Investor's Business Daily ^ | July 16, 2013 | IBD EDITORIALS

Bill Of Rights: A Nevada family files a lawsuit after police literally seize their house to use as a command post after entering without a warrant and assaulting family members. Isn't this what helped start the American Revolution?
For those who snoozed through civics class, recent news events have provided an education on the U.S. Constitution, the bedrock of American democracy, assaulted by an administration that views it as obstructionist and irrelevant and by courts that view it as a "living document" — which is to say it means whatever they say it means on any given day.
The contraceptive mandate within ObamaCare has assaulted the Constitution's freedom of religion guarantee in the First Amendment, for one. It has shredded the First Amendment again by confiscating the Associated Press' records and authorizing a warrant branding Fox News reporter James Rosen a traitor.
We have also learned about the Fifth Amendment, the one that IRS exempt-organizations chief Lois Lerner invoked to protect her right against self-incrimination — for trampling on that same right of others.
This administration has also shredded the 10th Amendment principle of federalism, again through ObamaCare, which forces states to do what they don't want to do under powers they don't think the feds have.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...

DoJ sending trial balloon about demurring on Zimmerman?

Hot Air ^ | July 16, 2013 | Ed Morrissey

In the aftermath of the acquittal of George Zimmerman, the White House tried to assure angry supporters of the Trayvon Martin family that the investigation would continue. Eric Holder yesterday told a luncheon that “I share your concern” over the “tragic, unnecessary shooting death,” while members of Congress pushed the Department of Justice to take some kind of action to address the situation. Today, though, the Washington Post hears from sources within the DoJ that federal action is all but impossible:
Current and former Justice Department officials said Monday that bringing civil rights charges against George Zimmerman in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, an unarmed black 17-year-old in Florida, would be extremely difficult and may not be possible.
Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. vowed to continue a federal investigation of the matter, but other officials said in interviews that the government may not be able to charge Zimmerman with a federal hate crime because it’s not clear that he killed Martin because of his race.
The weakness of the evidence compounds the political problems facing President Obama and Holder, who are under mounting pressure from many liberal and African American groups to bring a federal case against Zimmerman after a Florida jury acquitted him Saturday of second-degree murder and manslaughter.
Actually, it’s more clear that race was not a motivating factor. The FBI determined that already in its report, picked up by The Smoking Gun and published over the weekend. One of the jurors in the case emphasized that last night in an interview with Anderson Cooper on CNN:
The six-member jury that acquitted George Zimmerman did not believe race played a role in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, the first juror to speak publicly about the trial said Monday night....
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...


foxnews.com ^ | July 16, 2013 | John Gibson

The incomparable Rachel Jeantel, the person Trayvon Martin spoke to on his phone just before he was shot and killed, last night explained why George Zimmerman was wrong to feel his life was in danger and he needed to go for his gun.
It was just a case of “whup-ass”, she said on television. Her interviewer, the dense-Brit CNN host Piers Morgan, failed to immediately grasp her meaning and let the moment slip by. But if by some strange twist of fate millions of Americans were watching (they were not), any of them would have immediately understood her statement.
Translated from Jeantel-ese: “Hey white boy, take your beating and shut the f*#k up.”
Seriously. It was just a case of “whup-ass”. You s’posed to take it, cracka.
Ms. Jeantel explained everybody in the ‘hood understands what a whup-ass is. It’s not getting bashed, not getting beaten so badly you might die, it’s just getting your ass “whupped.” Consequently, the question arises in Ms. Jeantel’s mind: What’s your problem, white boy?
The theme that seems to be coming out of the black community, as encapsulated in Ms. Jeantel’s illuminating phrasing, is that black people never got their forty acres and a mule, and now they demand adding a white-boy whup-ass to the list, let’s just say as compounded interest on a long over-due bill.
There are more civilized ways to express this feeling, of course. You’d never hear NBC’s star anchor Al Sharpton or the NAACP’s Ben Jealous put it precisely in Ms. Jeantel’s indelicate phrasing, but the promise that “this ain’t over” sends the same message.
Why did George Zimmerman have to shoot Trayvon dead? He was just getting a whup-ass, you dumb cracka.
(Excerpt) Read more at radio.foxnews.com ...

Polling Shows That Sources Of Racism Are Now Reversed

Investors Business Daily ^ | 7-8-2013 | Thomas Sowell

I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.
Apparently other Americans also recognize that the sources of racism are different today from what they were in the past. According to a recent Rasmussen poll, 31% of blacks think that most blacks are racists, while 24% of blacks think that most whites are racist.
The difference between these percentages is not great, but it is remarkable nevertheless. After all, generations of blacks fought the white racism from which they suffered for so long. If many blacks themselves now think that most other blacks are racist, that is startling.
The moral claims advanced by generations of black leaders — claims that eventually touched the conscience of the nation and turned the tide toward civil rights for all — have now been cheapened by today's generation of black "leaders," who act as if it is all just a matter of whose ox is gored
Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-on-the-right/070813-662856-racism-has-taken-on-a-startling-new-hue.htm#ixzz2ZDkUngeI Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook
(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...

Study: Obamacare could cause 1 million low-income Americans to move from work to welfare!

AEI ^ | July 15,2013 | James Pethokoukis

Applying our labor supply estimates directly to this population, we predict a decline in employment of between 530,000 and 940,000 in response to this group of individuals being made newly eligible for free or heavily subsidized health insurance. This would represent a decline in the aggregate employment rate of between 0.3 and 0.6 percentage points from this single component of the ACA.
The researchers arrive at these numbers by examining the labor market impact of Tennessee’s 2005 decision to discontinue its expansion of TennCare, the state’s Medicaid system. They found that the TennCare disenrollment caused “a large and immediate labor supply increase” as folks who lost coverage starting looking for work. More:
Indeed, we find a similarly large increase in private health insurance following the disenrollment, suggesting that public health insurance had been “crowding out” private health insurance When we explore the dynamic effects of the disenrollment, we find an immediate increase in job search behavior and a steady rise in both employment and health insurance coverage. The pattern of changes in labor supply and the crowdout behavior suggest that disenrollees entered the labor market and gained employment in order to procure health insurance. This finding is consistent with both.
And Obamacare would cause the reverse effect, pushing those getting subsidized coverage to leave the labor force. The result is especially worrisome for the health of working America if you combine it with Obamacare’s possible nudge toward more part-time workers in place of full-time workers.
(Excerpt) Read more at aei-ideas.org ...

Grievance Industry Outlook: Blacks are 12.5% of our population, but they commit 49% of our homicides!

American Thinker ^ | 07/16/2013 | Michael Geer

Trayvon Martin was killed by a single round from George Zimmerman's Kel-Tec 9mm, fired from an intermediate distance (1-18 inches) while Trayvon Martin was beating Zimmerman MMA style.
This incident took place on the evening of February 26, 2012.
A moment in time pounced upon by the U.S. mainstream media, the nation's venomous and perpetual Grievance Industry and the current Administration. Producing an avalanche of politically correct opinion, judicial malfeasance, political arm twisting, calls for vengeance, threats, intimidation and under the table maneuverings among political players.
The resulting hypocrisy is nothing less than staggering. It is eye opening to compare the Zimmerman ordeal to other notable acts of violence during the same period of time.
Between February 12, 2012 and the Verdict -
Chicago: 2012: February through December 500 homicides.
Virtually all young black men near to the same profile as Trayvon Martin. 2013: By the beginning of July the city already had 200 homicides. 2,670 people shot for a total of 7.3 gunshot victims every day.
Grievance Industry? (crickets)
Mainstream Media? (crickets)
Notable U.S. City homicide rates - 2011 Stats
1. New Orleans - 199 homicides
2. Detroit - 411 homicides
3. St. Louis - 113 homicides
4. Baltimore - 217 homicides
5. Philadelphia - 331 homicides
In comparison to the George Zimmerman coverage?
Grievance Industry? (crickets)
Mainstream Media? (crickets)
The percentage of urban homicides in terms of Race Politics is heavily weighted to black deaths. While George Zimmerman is forced to stand trial, black on black crime is an epidemic.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...

Race Relations In America Improving Every Year, And The Media Hates It

MediaIte ^ | 07/16/2013 | by Noah Rothman

Many readers of this post clicked through only because they were appalled at the implication in that headline – that racism in America is on the decline. This empirical, undeniable reality provokes predictable expressions of disbelief, rage, and frustration from those who wish to believe it is not true. They are the predictable reactions one would expect to follow any expression of heresy which contradicts canonical “truths.”
Those who insist that race relations in America are on the decline are provided with ample, anecdotal evidence on a daily basis from the news media which supports this article of faith. But the overwhelming preponderance of evidence contradicts this assertion. Even merely asserting that there has been undeniable progress in relations between blacks and whites in the U.S. over the course of a single generation is greeted with horror from the establishment media. Much like the prosecutors in the trial of George Zimmerman argued that the jurors needed to decide the case with their hearts rather than their heads, the media asks its audience to emote and disregard the facts when discussing racial politics in America. This is a tragedy.
In a post last week, I noted that political commentators – on the left and right – predicting civil unrest in the event that Zimmerman was found not guilty were displaying an offensive lack of faith in or knowledge of the black community. That verdict came and, with some small-scale exceptions, that event was not characterized by a violent response from African-Americans. Unsurprisingly, though opinions about the correctness of the verdict varied, the vast majority of all Americans internalized the jury’s decision rationally.
This prediction was not a difficult one to make. Any historical reading of the progress of race relations in this country suggests that they are far better today than they were in 1992 – the last time a shocking trial verdict resulted in widespread rioting.
Gallup polling over the course of the last 50 years measures the trajectory of how blacks and whites view one another. Since Gallup started recording data on race relations in 1963, the trend has been an undeniably positive one.
In June of that year, respondents were asked “do you think that blacks have as good a chance as white people in your community to get any kind of job for which they are qualified?” Only 39 percent said that they were, while 48 percent said that they were not. The next time they asked that question, in June of 1978, that result had flipped with 67 percent of respondents saying that African-Americans were qualified for and had access to whatever opportunities they chose to seek while just 24 percent disagreed. Though the number has fluctuated throughout history, today between 71 and 79 percent of Americans think blacks have “as good a chance” as white people to have access to the career of their choice.
Another dramatic shift can be observed in how Americans think “civil rights for blacks have changed in this country.” In 1995, in the wake of the verdict in the trial of O.J. Simpson, only 32 percent of Americans said that civil rights for blacks had “greatly improved” while 51 percent said civil rights had only improved “somewhat.” In August, 2011, 50 percent said that civil rights for blacks had “greatly improved” with 39 percent qualifying that improvement with “somewhat.”
In 2011, a full 76 percent of Americans believe that “new civil rights laws” are “not needed” to advance racial equality. Just 21 percent said that they were – down dramatically from August, 1993, when 38 percent agreed that new laws relating to civil rights are necessary.
Following the O.J. verdict, 68 percent of Americans said that race relations in America will “always be a problem.” Only 29 percent said they believed that racial animus will “eventually” disappear. In 2011, 52 percent believed that race relations between blacks and whites will “eventually [be] worked out.” 46 percent insist that problems will persist, up from 30 percent in 2008 following the election of the first black President of the United States.
In Gallup’s most recent survey of the state of race relations in America in January, 2013, a majority of Americans said that they were “somewhat” or “very” satisfied with racial progress in America. While all of the above data points have fluctuated – and racial progress comes in fits and starts, occasionally receding at times – the trajectory of race relations in America are following a historically positive trend.
It is not merely a fact of American life measured in survey responses. Gaps indicative of racial disparity in this country continue to dissipate. “According to the most recent census data, blacks have virtually closed the gap with whites not only in the percentage graduating from high school but also in the percentage graduating from junior college,” wrote Orlando Patterson in the New York Times… in 1997. Today, in an underreported but critical development showing how race relations have improved, the 2010 census showed that, while blacks were slightly less likely than other groups to receive a college degree, “Blacks were also more likely to have completed some college than any other group.”
Unfortunately halted by the onset of the Great Recession, the income and wage gap between blacks and whites was gradually, though not fast enough, approaching parity in 2005. Persistently higher unemployment among blacks in the wake of the financial downturn has exacerbated the perennial problem of a wealth disparity between the races. But the statistical trends are hard to ignore.
None of these statistics are cited as an effort to show race relations are perfect, or that racial disparity does not exist. Inequality and racism do exist in America – in varying degrees, they probably always will. But these statistics do empirically advance the notion that the equality of opportunity for blacks and whites, as well as non-white Hispanics and Asians, is progressing every year.
Many, particularly those in the elite media, react bitterly to this news. The outcome of the Zimmerman trial has highlighted how many media professionals cling to the belief that racial disparity in America is fixed feature of its existence and will never appreciably dissipate.
“Do you think the American justice system is innately racist?” CNN anchor Candy Crowley asked Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn on Sunday morning.
“This is, for many Americans, another piece of evidence of the incontrovertible contempt that this nation often shows and displays for black men,” argued radio and television host Tavis Smalley on ABC’s This Week on Sunday.
The Nation‘s Mychal Denzel Smith parodied left-wing overreaction by saying that Zimmerman’s defense “literally invoked the same justification for the killing of Trayvon Martin that you would during lynching.”
“George Zimmerman was protecting, not just himself, but white womanhood from this vicious, black thug,” Smith added breathlessly.
These are the same media voices likely to call for a “frank, national conversation on race” after making these comments which can only be characterized as conversation-stifling. It has never become clearer that the media rewards commentators who reject measured conversation and the fostering of a dialogue for irresponsible baiting and instigation.
At the very least, responsible news anchors and commentators should be arming their viewers with the facts prior to rending garments over the state of race relations in America. Even if these statistics do not support the narrative of persistent racial hatred which they have committed their careers to addressing.

MSNBC Contributor: More White Kids Must Die Before We Understand Racism!

Katie Pavlich
Recommend this article 
In light of a jury finding George Zimmerman not guilty of murder or manslaughter over the weekend, the folks over at MSNBC are becoming even more unhinged than usual. Monday during a panel on NOW with Alex Wagner, MSNBC contributor, fill-in host and Georgetown Professor Michael Eric Dyson suggested America won't understand racism until more white children are killed. Via Twitchy:

So now we get more approximate to the truth of what race is in this country. As for Eric Holder, look: the reality is you gotta act now. The president, you won the second term. You’re in office. You are ensconced. Do something courageous, bold, and helpful. Not only to African American people but to America. Because unless we do this, white Americans and others will feel that this was a justifiable verdict, this is how things happen. Not until, and unless, the number of white kids die that approximate the numbers of black and other kids who die, will America see. It’s beyond logic. It’s about rationality. It’s about let’s get something done. I think the attorney general will look at this and I think it’s time for him to act.”

There's just one huge problem with this whole thing outside of how offensive it is: the George Zimmerman-Trayvon Martin case had zero to do with race according to the jury that acquitted him. Not to mention, Zimmerman is Hispanic who helped mentor and care for black children inside his home.

The George Zimmerman trial was not about race and the Florida neighborhood watch volunteer was justified in firing the shot that killed Trayvon Martin because he feared for his life, one of the jurors told CNN on Monday.

Juror B-37, a mother of two who grew up in a military family and used to have a permit to carry a concealed weapon, said she did not believe Zimmerman racially profiled the unarmed black teenager when he called police to report a suspicious person.

"All of us thought race did not play a role," the juror told Anderson Cooper in an interview with her identity concealed.

This isn't Dyson's first stretch of the truth or overly offensive statement on race. Two weeks ago Dyson said this in reference to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas:

“A symbolic Jew has invited a metaphoric Hitler to commit holocaust and genocide upon his own people.”
Guy contacted MSNBC to see if there would be any consequences for his statement about Thomas.

Hello XXXX,

My name is Guy Benson, and I’m the Political Editor of Townhall.com in Washington, DC.  I was hoping to get a comment from MSNBC management about whether or not contributor Michael Eric Dyson will face any disciplinary action or sanctions for a statement he made on Thursday’s Martin Bashir show regarding Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas:

“A symbolic Jew has invited a metaphoric Hitler to commit holocaust and genocide upon his own people.”

I recall that the network suspended Mark Halperin in 2011 for referring to the president as “kind of a dick” on air.  Is Dyson’s remark considered less inappropriate? Thank you for your assistance with this.
He was ignored. 

I haven’t received any response from MSNBC.  To my knowledge, Dyson has not been disciplined in any way. 

 I remain keen on discovering why Halperin’s 2011 comment was deemed worthy of an indefinite suspension, whereas Dyson has apparently gotten off scot free here.  It couldn’t have anything to do with MSNBC’s documented and overt bias, or its aggressive descent into non-news, could it?

UPDATE – Twitter points out that NBC News effectively did render a judgment on Dyson’s performance.  He was rewarded with a plum panelist slot on the network’s signature Sunday news program, Meet the Press.  His appearance was vintage Dyson, natch.
I won't hold my breathe waiting for MSNBC to do something about the "more white kids must die" comments. In the meantime though, police are investigating a beating in Baltimore where a witness says he heard "This is for Trayvon."

Baltimore police say they are investigating a witness account that a group of black youths beat a Hispanic man near Patterson Park Sunday while saying, "This is for Trayvon."

A witness posted the account on a community Facebook page, and police confirmed they are looking into whether the suspects' reaction to the verdict in the Florida trial of George Zimmerman played a part in the incident. A police report on the beating does not mention the alleged comments.

The Media View

Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman media bias

It's Time for Obama to Live Up To His Race-Uniting Promise

Townhall.com ^ | July 16, 2013 | David Limbaugh

On the heels of the George Zimmerman verdict, when this nation deeply needs a tense situation defused and soothing, reassuring words of racial unity, the President and attorney general give us just the opposite.
We desperately need to strive for racial harmony and unity, but our task is exceedingly more difficult when President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder repeatedly invoke race and stir racial tensions.
Trayvon Martin's death was terribly tragic, but Obama's and Holder's racially charged statements (and sometimes actions) are damaging. Even if Obama hadn't promised to be a uniter, he'd have a duty, as do all political leaders, not to stir tension between blacks and whites.
When Obama became a serious presidential contender, I was concerned about his apparent attitude toward race. There were the candid admissions in his books, his long attendance at a race-oriented church and certain statements he had made that indicated racial bitterness as part of his makeup.
All of this was completely at odds with the public image Obama carefully sought to project and with the promise that he would inaugurate a new era of post-racial politics.
The mere suggestion that Obama had racial hang-ups brought condemnation from those who a) love to characterize conservatives as racist, b) believe that, by definition, blacks can't be racist toward whites, c) glow in feelings of self-congratulation when they point the accusatory finger of racism at others, and d) were idealistically invested in the idea that racism would be extinguished upon the election of the first African-American president.
I hoped I was wrong about Obama, but in office, he has steadily removed any doubt. He began employing identity politics from the get-go and encouraging supporters to brand opposition to his policies as racist.
Holder said Americans are cowards on the race issue. Obama let stand the suggestion that many of his opponents have a "subterranean agenda" concerning race. He appealed to blacks and Hispanics in explicitly racial terms, telling them they had to elect Democrats.
In its report to the United Nations Human Rights Council, the administration chastised America as racially discriminatory. It expressly condemned Arizona's immigration law as racist.
The entire liberal establishment has smeared supporters of voter ID laws as racists. Holder attempted to deflect attention from his own wrongdoing over Operation Fast and Furious by saying that his accusers were pursuing him as a way of getting at President Obama because they are both African-Americans.
There is no excuse for the President of the United States and his attorney general to contribute to racial tensions in America, but that is exactly what they have done, whether intentionally (for political gain) or because they just can't help themselves.
When a reporter asked Obama about the arrest of Harvard professor Henry Gates, an African-American friend of Obama's, Obama said the Cambridge policemen who arrested Gates had acted "stupidly," despite admitting he wasn't aware of all the facts.
Concerning Martin, even the Washington Post reported that Obama decided to "assertively insert himself into" the "controversy" when he said: "When I think about this boy, I think about my own kids. ... If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon."
I ask you: Was that a proper statement from a President of all the American people, let alone one professedly committed to uniting the races? How can the chief executive of the United States possibly justify such a racially charged comment, which could have poisoned the jury pool, especially when, as was the case with the Gates incident, he couldn't have known all the facts?
In the wake of the jury's acquittal of Zimmerman, Obama weighed in again, this time exploiting the entire event, just as he had the Sandy Hook shootings, to promote gun control. "That's the way to honor Trayvon Martin," he said, unmistakably signaling that he is still heavily invested in the case as a matter of race.
Then there was the additionally disturbing revelation by the Daily Caller -- and other outlets -- that the Community Relations Service, a division of the Justice Department, "was deployed to Sanford, Florida (in 2012) to provide security for anti-George Zimmerman protests, including a rally headlined by activist Al Sharpton."
So now we have not just our political leaders making overtly divisive statements on race but the administration spending taxpayer money for the purpose of agitation. Just when you think things can't get much worse.
If there is any authenticity in Obama's claims to seek racial harmony in America, now is the time for him to make a 180-degree turn and use his bully pulpit to promote racial harmony. I am under no illusions that he will do so, but I can nevertheless pray that he will.