The good news from Ferguson

First, the bad news, I'll come to the good news in a moment. 

A black youth was killed by a police officer, in Ferguson.  That is an accepted fact.  And it is of course, very sad that yet another life has been violently ended.  It is not clear if the police officer will be charged for the death.

The youth, Michael Brown, certainly won't now be tried for the violence and intimidation that he inflicted upon a shopkeeper from whom he stole, immediately prior to the shooting event.  As we have seen in recent days, the almost cherubic image that is portrayed by the photograph displayed on British media, is now transitioning to a more complete picture.   This is a picture of a 6' 4" individual weighing 290 lbs (130Kg).  You get a good sense of what those bare statistics mean when one views the confrontation between Michael Brown and the diminutive shopkeeper.  Michael Brown was a powerful young man and seemingly was prepared to use that power in furtherance of criminal activity.

Indeed, the circumstances surrounding the shooting are in dispute but Darren Wilson, the police officer that shot and fatally wounded Michael Brown, was assaulted by Brown.  The degree of Wilson's injuries is disputed - some saying a swollen and bruised face and others saying a fractured eye-socket.  What isn't disputed is that Wilson did suffer injuries.  Also that prior to this, Wilson had a clean disciplinary history in his 4 years with the police department.

There is a clamour for Officer Wilson to be tried for the 'murder' of Michael Brown.  It will come as no surprise that the usual suspect, race-baiter (and sometimes FBI snitch) Al Sharpton is leading the charge for Wilson's arraignment.  Sharpton, you may recall, led the campaign related to the case of Tawana Brawley, in 1987.  This, then 15 year-old girl, made accusations that she was raped by 6  white men.  These allegations were found to be entirely without foundation though not before Sharpton whipped-up community anger and garnered much media attention by insisting that the alleged rape was racially motivated.

This time, Sharpton has a black president in the White House and a black Attorney General and these two now come onto the scene.  President Obama's comments have been reasonably moderate as he needs to be mindful of not prejudicing the ongoing inquiries (and also no doubt his plunging poll ratings).  Eric Holder has been somewhat cautious in his remarks but has shown by his visit to the family of Brown and comments about his experience as a black man, where his sympathies lie.

Eric Holder though, is the good news we have all been waiting for.

Eric Holder has discovered that he has jurisdiction over the FBI.  Indeed such power that he can order that the FBI sends 40 investigators to look into the shooting of Michael Brown and 'establish the truth'.

Now I think this is very encouraging.

I am heartened by Holder now finding out that he can order the FBI to conduct investigations.  Perhaps he can now move away from such issues as the Michael Brown case, which stir so many negative memories from his own youth, and move on to other matters which pre-date Michael Brown's death.

I am talking about, Holder setting the FBI loose on the IRS scandal or the deaths in Benghazi  of 4 American citizens.  Or investigating the scandal surrounding the porous southern US border or the flagrant disregard for human life shown by personnel within the Veterans Administration.  Other than the IRS scandal, these issues have all generated far more deaths than the single tragedy that was Michael Brown.

I know that most people would expect that any investigation of these scandals would bring hard times for the Obama administration but, when Holder isn't playing the race card -given the frequency that he does play this card, he must surely be using two decks - he insists that the integrity of his office requires that he act properly etc. and so we can surely expect that now that Holder knows he has an investigative arm, he will use this on these scandals?  Do you think??

I know that former IRS chief, Lois Lerner, keeps taking 'the fifth' but surely a concerted effort by the FBI can discover or recover some or all of those deleted e-mails?  In this digital age, our electronic 'prints' go far, deep and wide!

Similarly, the premier investigators at the FBI could uncover the conspiracy at the heart of the maladministration of the VA?  Shinseki fell on his sword and was replaced but the fundamentals - veterans being denied medical treatment for extended periods of time - continue.  The head has been changed but the cancer at the heart of the administration carries on eating away and causing the unnecessary deaths of former military personnel.

Maybe the investigators could also look into the activities of the race-baiter, Al Sharpton.  This man has made an industry out of his hatred of white people.  He loses no opportunity play the blame game - the one where all of the ills of society are the fault of the white man!  In a world where children get suspended from school, because they abuse another child by calling their actions 'gay', surely the hatred that spews from the maw of Sharpton is an actual crime, in addition to being an aural one?

Take heart though!  Holder now knows he can investigate!!

Using language

If you're a liberal, socialist or communist you don't need to read this.  You already know what I am about to say.  You do this all the time.

This message is for conservatives.

We conservatives need to start using language more effectively. 

Consider.  What does the word progressive denote?  Let's skip the dictionary definition.  In political parlance this means someone of the left.  The left has taken a positive word and made it their own.  So policies that increase the encroachment of the state into our lives are said to be progressive.  Policies that infringe more and more on the liberties of people are promoted by progressives.  And, if you oppose such a policy, then you are a reactionary.  You are not forward thinking, you are a throwback to the bad old times.  You don't want the state reading all of your e-mails and listening to your calls?  What have you got to hide?  The state has to do this because the state is your sole protector!

Consider also.  What is a racist?  Or perhaps more accurately, what makes someone eligible to be called a racist? 

Today, you are a racist if you are white and are non-Muslim and you dare to question anyone who isn't white or Muslim.  You are racist if you say that the abomination that is female genital mutilation, which is widely practised in some countries, is wrong.  You are a racist because those countries happen to be Muslim. 

You are a racist if you say that Obamacare is a disaster because its chief architect happens to be non-white.  You might not mention Obama's colour when disparaging Obamacare.  You might try and be clever and restrict your comments to the shortcomings of the internet sign-up process but that won't save you! 

You are racist if you dare to question why the organs of the federal state descend upon Cliven Bundy's Nevada ranch, armed to the teeth, over an unpaid tax bill of $1M but let the hate-monger Al Sharpton prowl the networks spouting his anti-white bile, while owing the IRS somewhere north of $1.7M.

Leftists and liberals close down arguments by throwing labels at  people, watching them stick and then refusing to debate with a racist or a homophobe or a misogynist  or whatever.  In the UK and in the USA, you are a racist if you want to even try and talk about immigration.  Somehow great swathes of the population, who have legitimate concerns, are labeled racists and, quite naturally shrink back from the debate because, who wants to be called a racist?

Who wants to be associated with the Klu Klux Klan or the Nazi party both of which pushed truly racist - as in racial purity type - policies.  Interestingly, the KKK were established by the Democrats (party of the left) in the USA and the name Nazi comes from National Socialists, also of the left!

While we are in a historic moment, think also about how galling it must be for American Republicans to be lectured on racism and called racists by Democrats.  The emancipation of slaves in America,  came about because of a Republican President with the support of the Republican party and against the overwhelming and unanimous opposition of the Democrat party!

I could go on citing numerous examples of where the left ignores its historical association with failed and wrong policies and now takes the moral high ground but that isn't the purpose of this post.

I think it is time that we started 'flipping' the words and change the terms of debate. 

So for example,  anyone that promotes stifling debate on immigration - inflows in the UK and amnesty in the USA, is called a reactionary and a racist and is someone that wants to push a reactionary and racist policy.  Anyone that wants to talk about these issues is progressive.  They want to be seen as thinking of the future.

Low taxes and smallest possible  government - that is progressive!  Ever higher state involvement in all aspects of life? That is regressive and illiberal! 

I hope you get my drift. 

From now on, please start throwing those labels right back at the left.  Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, President Obama, Jay Carney, the Democrat Party or CAIR in the USA and the Labour party, the BBC, UNITE union, the EU and the Lib Dems  in the UK - all rabid racists.  Reactionaries, every single one of them. 
 
In the 'twittersphere' one see lots of tweets from American conservatives concerned at Obama's attack on the 2nd Amendment (right to bear arms).  Some have already got my message.  They post pictures of weapons and to the statement - 'ban guns' - the response is 'it's because I'm black, isn't it!'   I just love how banning guns can be shown to be racist!  More please.