La Retribucion

I overheard a group of hispanics talking about the sudden uptick in ICE contact and deportations. The older guy was looking very distressed, and  I surmised that he was concerned about his personal immigration status.

Here is the deal.

Interim President #45 is seething with anger right now. His travel Ban has been questioned and is at this point, stalled in the courts, preventing him from seeing through his haphazardly crafted executive order. His blood must be absolutely boiling just beneath his thin skin.

Since he is being prevented from kicking muslims in their nuts, he has turned his short temper in the direction of a nearby target, and is lashing out, determined to kick the Mexican people in the teeth. If he can’t hurt the muslims, then he will arrest, deport, harass and terrorize as many illegal aliens as possible in the interim.

It’s another form of negotiation for him. What he is saying is:
“Give me the Muslims and perhaps I will let you keep your latinos.” (for now)
I expect that he is deadly serious, and things could escalate if he can’t have his way. He may even heat up the conflict between Black Lives Matter and Urban police, reigniting the fake news narrative about the “War on Police.”

Expect him to lash out in every direction until he wins this one thing that is sticking in his craw. He will not be able to let it go – as usual.

The K Has Spoken

Since you have pulse, you may already know that David Duke, the former Grand Wizard of the K, has endorsed Donald Trump and told his supremacy groups that “voting for anybody besides Donald Trump at this point, is really treason to your heritage...” When asked about the controversial endorsement this morning, Trump claimed that he does not know who David Duke is, and refused to rebuke the endorsement until he had time to research Duke and his constituency.
I guess you would have to be Jewish, Muslim, Black or Latino to know who David Duke is or what he represents.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/david-duke-trump-219777#ixzz41UnZgUgc

Return

Righteous Rudy -vrs- Bey

Dude.
If you can look at this picture and all you can do is walk away mad at her vague political references… shame on you.
Yes.
We could say that her statements are pro black lives and anti ROUGE police. So whats wrong with that? She didn’t advocate killing police. She didn’t even say Fuck the police. In fact her overall message was “stop killing us.”
If you’re a law and order advocate then you should champion any message that protests the criminally bad actions of bad actors that threaten the reputation of good police.
You clowns prefer to attack a young girl, trying to make a difference, and instead support bad cops. No matter what happened, you start bellyaching about “a rush to judgement,” hoping to run out the clock, and send your good ole boy back to work. You’re afraid that its a slippery slope. If we find even one cop guilty, it could lead to another conviction.
The point is that this crap has been going on all the time – but nobody had a camera in their pocket way back when.
The black community does not hate the police, except for the criminal ones. We need and respect good cops. The problem in the hood is that we never know which kind of cop we will meet on a dark summer night – good or bad.

BTW: Message to Rudy Giuliani. Bernard Kerik.
Whenever Rudy Giuliani rears his ugly head, I like to invoke the name of Bernard Kerik. Rudy spent his considerable political capital and convinced the naive cronnie infected Bush administration that Kerik would make a good head of homeland security. It might have worked to, had one of his hoes not busted him out.
Read all about it. 

Oscars

     There may not be any good answers for the controversy surrounding the 2016 Academy Awards. Yes there is a racial component, although I am hesitant to go all out and invoke the word racist.
The very concept of the Oscar awards seems to in direct opposition to charges of racism. As far back as I can recall, and as far back as research suggests, Oscar has always leaned towards Artsie Fartsie story telling. Big budgets and box office block busters have never been the stuff of Oscar. Block Buster themes, effects and cinematography are themselves higher forms of art, and are welcome in the lap of the Academy. The voters tend to be marbleized, credentialed old stuffy white guys. There may be a built in racist component to their way of thinking, but it is more likely that they just don’t like the kind of movies that would be focused on minorities.They probably don’t like their message and certainly would reject anything critical of the old world in which they have always dominated. They probably are unable to vote for a movie such as Straight Out of Compton, mainly because they either refused to watch it, or went to sleep in the process.
Forcing their hand or replacing their voting block with members that do not treasure the purity of the Academy itself will never net the results anyone who cares would find to be acceptable. It would water down the process, and cause members to just chose a black – any black in order to shut them up.
It will be like forcing the Vatican to embrace abortion.

 

 

You da man

Watching this video reminded me of an interview that I saw years ago with Jim Brown. Of course I can’t recall the whole thing, but I walked away with a moral to the story that was highly powerful. The gist of his statement concerned his attitude about running a play during his record-setting nine year career as a fullback for the Cleveland Browns. He talked about becoming aware of the opposing defender, moving in for the tackle. At this point, according to Brown he would turn on the defender and make them pay for daring to interfere with his run. The collision would probably serve as a deterrent in the next play.

I am big on manhood and have little tolerance for any man that acquiesces his responsibility. I recall a young man once that was having trouble in his marriage. He said to me “my wife won’t let me be a man.” I was appalled. I immediately and quite gruffly took him to task for such a foolish bitch made statement. I scolded him and admonished him, because a man should never have to ask permission to simply be a man. I told him that his wife has no responsibility to sanction his manhood. If he is asking permission to be a man, she has every right to deny his request until he can prove his worth.

While I am up on my soapbox, I may as well expand on the story.
I worked for a short time at an internationally known four-star hotel. I admit that I was an arrogant jerk, because the amount of money that I was making was not very motivating. My supervisor brought me in for a chat. One of our problems was that he had become used to managing young hispanic men, with little more than high school educations, and little prospect for higher employment. I had told him that there was a manner of approach that he would need to consider when talking to me, because I was not an impressionable 20 something kid. He stated that “He realized that I was a grown man, but in order to keep my job, I would have to set my manhood aside…”

Again I was appalled and incensed. I told him that “man to man, the very idea that he thought it possible to set manhood aside was troubling to me.” Needless to say, my tenure did not last much longer, but in the spirit of cooperation that he had advised me to adopt, he too was summarily dismissed from his lofty management position – in spite of his propensity to kiss his master’s ass.

In this video, Jim Brown nailed it. The question was concerning racism, nut something far more insidious was uncovered. A man should never seek validation for enforcing and displaying his manhood for all to see – not for them to accept or validate.

 

 

Equivalency Argument

Whenever a cop (or a group of cops) kills an armed, unarmed, or non-compliant black man, the fair minded members of the inteligencia community eventually gets around to blaming the victim. They question his previous arrests, or his drug habits, or maybe even his school records. The media finds faded, out of focus, often grainy pictures of the victim grimacing, wearing a hoodie or football shoulder pads. His parents counter the smear campaign with photos of their little darling at his birthday party, or dressed up in a tux, gently pinning a corsage on his girlfriend’s wrist, and at last the heart wrenching graduation picture, with the sun shinning at his back.

Its all theater, but the acting has only begun. If the dirt surrounding the cops begins to pile up too thick, the tribe will bond together. Known liberal supporters of downtrodden urban unfortunates eventually join the lynch mob. Their typically saccharin flavored smiles turn upside down, and their sense of outrage turns against the dead victim. The focus turns away from the guilt or innocence of the victim or the police(men) that killed him and suddenly the equivalency argument comes into play. The subject unexpectedly changes and becomes a whining and unified chorus of ponderance, at last seeking to resolve the weighty and reoccurring question of black on black crime.

Once the evidence is cold, emotions have aged, and justice is forced to finally turn against itself and find an officer guilty, society will surely question why there is no equivalency of outrage when blacks kill blacks, or even worse – when blacks kill whites. “Whites, they always say, do not take to the streets and march, like disturbed black protesters do.” Dare I invoke the antics of the KKK, who has been known to occasionally hide behind their masks and the first amendment, while they partake in a parade of government sanctioned and permitted unrest.

When they can’t mouth an acceptable response to the slogan “Black Lives Matter”, the righteous turn the idea on its head, and pretend that the very concept somehow fails to regard the salient idea that white lives and of course – all lives matter.

Now the subject has been changed, and society can take the high ground that temporarily overlooks the murder of a black man. “Come to think of it, they will say, why is there is no outcry when gang members of the black’s own tribe kills far more blacks than cops ever do?” As expected, all of the sudden justice itself has to be placed on hold while society questions the propriety of anger against cops when there is seemingly no equivalent anger against other blacks that kill blacks or when these blacks outrageously kill whites. It is an effective dodge, but not an effective shield.

I would certainly understand the outrage, if a crowd of whites decided to demonstrate the loss of one of their tribe. Its not a mystery why they prefer to suffer their outrage in relative silence when faced with a black on white crime. I suspect that they have a belief that there will be a proper handing out of justice in court. There is no reason to demonstrate or protest when there will be a full and public accounting of the process.

If there be video of the crime, it will be on display immediately. Names and booking photos of any suspects will be released daily. A grand jury, if necessary will indite a perp with a quickness and a jury will likely find the suspects guilty as hell. Nothing to protest if the outcome is historically predestined.

The big issue that I am silently attempting to protestis that there is always an attempt to link the criminal actions of CRIMINALS, whose fate will never be disputed by me, with the actions of trained, sworn, and trusted police officers with a duty to protect the men that they kill..

http://www.1man1vote.com

A Nation of Negros

It has long been an accepted statement of fact that “one drop of black blood in a child, would magically transform him from a child of mixed race parents into a negro”. Well, apparently to those whose blood is sufficiently blue, we can extend that extrapolation of fact to state that “one drop of black blood in the White House transforms the entire United States into a Nation of Negroes”.

Witness if you will, the case of President Obama’s recent trip to England. Since 2003 there has been a mounting feud simmering between the United States and London, England. The Brits decided to impose a “congestion charge fee” to capture a financial base designed to pay the costs they incur due to parades, protests or state visits. They presented an invoice to the US Embassy for unpaid parking and traffic fines, and the Bush administration pushed back against them – refusing to pay. They labeled it a tax that violated the 1960 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which prohibits taxes on Diplomatic missions hosted by signatory nations.

As stated, this disagreement has been contested since 2003. This issue is cited because back in May, Boris Johnson, the Mayor of London, driven by a false sense of superiority, had the gall to step to President Obama and ask him for the money, face to face. Obama should have bitch slapped him for his insolence. He’s not even a head of state. He’s more like an executive administrator of a large village, and has no business confronting a President. I am convinced that he would never have violated protocol in the face of George W. Bush. But since he views Obama as a negro, at the helm of a nation of negroes, he felt no qualms about the breach.

Even at home in the USA, it’s easy to see that there has been a record of unprecedented disrespectful attitudes. Remember back in September 2009 during the President’s Health Care address? Republican representative, Joe Wilson yelled “You Lie” at the President while seated in the halls of Congress. To be sure, there were many rude and outlandish statements hurled at former President Bush, during his tenure, but never during a session, on the congressional floor in the people’s house. The tempo in congress has changed. The Republicans, hanging on to their narrow majority in the House of Representatives have stated publicly that cooperation with the President will give him an advantage in the 2012 elections, so right-wing talk jocks have threatened them and directed them not to co-operate, even if our economy grinds to a halt. They have seized upon their majority with a vengeance that goes beyond simple partisanship. Their attitude is devil may care. They are hell bent on breaking the USA if need be, by holding the economy down and increasing the suffering of the entire nation – no matter who gets hurt. It seems that they are carrying out a tantrum against those “negro-loving” liberals that put the President in the White House.

That attitude has resulted in a first ever public lynching of the US economy as the S&P lowers our credit rating from AAA, to AA+. The S&P is after all just another market index. Ironically, when they downgraded our credit rating, because they no longer trust the political process, they scare investors out of the bond market, where their only alternatives are to buy US treasury notes, or pay capital gains taxes. Even Donald Trump, one of the President’s most vociferous critics describes the downgrade as a publicity stunt. They have destabilized an already unstable global economy.

There has long been a running joke by comedians about how blacks are known to have bad credit. Now, as a Nation of Negroes, the joke comes true.