Tag: racism

Supreme Court rules that anti-fraud provisions (obviously) don’t violate the Voting Rights Act

Why would they?…

The Voting Rights Act bars regulations that result in racial discrimination. To claim that these laws are Voting Rights Act violations, you must claim that racial minorities cheat more than other groups and have a legal right to. Lolwut?

Sounds like there’s no way that’s not a huge exaggeration, I know, but to prove the argument is really that insulting, we’ll walk through it: 

After so many claims of fraud in the 2021 election, many emanating from Arizona, but none of them receiving their day in court with which to have their claims and evidence analyzed and cross examined and thus verified or debunked – Arizona legislature did the next best thing and at least made some common sense “make it harder to cheat” rules under new state voting law provisions that addressed some of the fraud claims. Everyone wins, right? The side that won the election doesn’t have to waste time listening to claims of evidence that they didn’t really win, and the side that claims they were cheated gets their “ways it could have happened” addressed. Since the Democrats didn’t cheat to win, this isn’t a problem, right? Well…

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals invalidated both Arizona provisions under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act under a broad claim that the state can’t be trusted because it’s so racist. Seriously… The 9th Circuit alleged state has a “long history of race-based discrimination against its American Indian, Hispanic, and African American citizens” and a “pattern of discrimination against minority voters has continued to the present day.” So by that “ur RACIST” edict, the court said that the state could not make laws that make cheating in elections so easy. Specifically:

The two Arizona provisions say 1- That ballots cast at the wrong precinct on Election Day must be wholly discarded and 2- A restriction on a practice known as “ballot harvesting” by requiring that only family caregivers, mail carriers and election officials can deliver another person’s completed ballot to a polling place. In other words: obvious logical anti-cheating adjustments that should have been made a long time ago and have nothing to do with race in any way whatsoever. Democrats just didn’t have a way to combat this or most other anti-democracy tactics of voting fraud, so they rely on the old “it’s racist!” claim.

In the escalation of this issue to the Supreme Court via the case Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee regarding Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act – the court pointed out that preventing fraud is actually a good, not racist, thing.

“Fraud can affect the outcome of a close election, and fraudulent votes dilute the right of citizens to cast ballots that carry appropriate weight” Justice Alito wrote, while also noting that fraud can “also undermine public confidence in the fairness of elections and the perceived legitimacy of the announced outcome.” 

Laws that a person has to vote in the precinct a person is registered to vote in is not discriminatory.

Restrictions on ballot harvesting are not discriminatory.

Hence the 6 to 3 ruling by the court.

The Left is angry because the ruling makes it harder to legally claim that opposition to cheating is racist.

It was the third significant decision on voting rights in the last 13 years by the court, along with the 2008 Crawford v. Marion County ruling and the 2013 Shelby v. Holder decision. All three have made it harder to prevent voter suppression, liberals argue, and easier for those in power to enact laws that erect obstacles to voting.

The impact of the three rulings, taken together, is that “the conservative Supreme Court has taken away all the major available tools for going after voting restrictions,” wrote Rick Hasen, an expert on election laws and the author of “Election Meltdown.” “This at a time when some Republican states are passing new restrictive voting laws.”

Yup. The court is “taking away all the major available tools for going after voting restrictions”. Those “major tools” being “using dishonest claims of racism to oppose policies you can’t attack on Constitutional, factual, or logical grounds”. So sad.

The Left lamented:

Supreme Court’s Voting Rights Act Decision Narrows Another Path to Challenge Discriminatory Voting Laws – ACLU.org

The Court’s Voting-Rights Decision Was Worse Than People Think –The Atlantic

Supreme Court Drives a Stake Through the Heart of the Voting Rights Act – Truthout.org

And in all these hysterical whoah’s, I was unable to find a single actual-argument (let alone any actual evidence) in support of the ludicrous claim that racial minorities disproportionally vote in-person in the wrong precincts and have a right to keep doing so, and/or why collecting mail-in ballots from voters who are unable or unwilling to submit those ballots themselves (which, remember – involves nothing but sealing the postage-free envelope, signing your name, and putting in your mail box – all of which is expressly allowed for caregivers and family members to do in the Arizona provisions) is an act of racial discrimination.

Everyone upset about this ruling is just mad that it’s harder to cheat.

“Thanks for the free stuff, Suckers!” – Clock Boy Ahmed to move to Quatar (and sues school)

Ahmed Mohamed, the kid who was briefly detained by police after bringing the innards from a disassembled nightstand clock to school in a briefcase and plugged it in to be found instead of obeying his teachers instruction to keep it covered since they both acknowledged that it looked like a bomb, is moving to the middle east with his crazy whom I am deducing put him up to all this (I don’t have proof of this – I’m just concluding based on his fathers radical past, anti-american suggestions and 9/11 Conspiracy pushing vs Ahmed himself whom by all accounts seems like a regular and pleasant American kid unfortunate enough to be in such a situation where he’s used as a prop in such a way).

Known as “clock boy”, Ahmed was briefly but high-profile-ly a pop-culture darling as hippie editors across the media scrambled to lionize his bomb prank that received no punishment (just brief inconvenience as he was questioned) as an example of racist America persecuting muslims.

After it was virtually unanimously confirmed that this was a hoax and said media-hippies were duped out of confirmation-bias that desperately hopes someone somewhere will embody their narrative of racist persecution, Ahmed faded from the headlines and now his family is moving to Qatar – a country that aids and abets terrorists – instead of accept his invites to intern at Twitter or go to MIT…

Ahmed responded, “I would love to!! MIT is my dream school.”

Eyman said Qatar is “basically like America,” because American universities like Texas A&M and Carnegie Mellon have Qatari-side campuses.

Also in the press release, Mohamed Elhassen Mohamed said: “After careful consideration of all the generous offers received, we would like to announce that we have accepted a kind offer from Qatar Foundation for Education, Science and Community Development (QF) for Ahmed to join the prestigious QF Young Innovators Program, which reflects the organization’s on-going dedication to empowering young people and fostering a culture of innovation and creativity.”

Earlier this month, QF gifted the teen and his family with a trip and tour of the five-mile Education City, founded by Al Jazeera creator Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, who is closely associated with the Muslim Brotherhood and opposes what he calls the “Judaization of Jerusalem” in referencing the Jewish Holy City and Israeli capitol, founded it. In late 2012, the New York Times reported Al Thani pledged $400 million to fund Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Mohamed Elhassen Mohamed said he was hugely impressed by the complex.

Of course…

Through out their entire time in the media spotlight, the family played the Islamophobia card, blaming the arrest and suspension on Ahmed being a “Muslim boy.” Earlier today, San Jose, California Democrat Rep. Mike Honda organized a press conference with Ahmed and the family to announce his effort in asking the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate Ahmed’s arrest and treatment by police, ABC News reported.

“We are going to move to a place where my kids can study and learn and all of them being accepted by that country,” said the patriarch earlier today to the Dallas news outlet. However, as Breitbart Texas reported, Ahmed’s clock woes happened based on the state and federal safe school and zero tolerance policies. Even the Associated Press agreed, blaming “rigid disciplinary policies” adopted by schools in the 199os.

But that wasn’t before getting shout outs from tech companies like Facebook and Google, and an invite to meet President Obama, and thousands of dollars in donations, and lots of free swag for some reason.

Ahmed with a ton of tech goodies gifted to him by Microsoft because Reasons.

UPDATE: Suing from Quatar, the family also wants $15 million from the city and school due to the psychological damage Ahmed allegedly suffered by being lawfully detained after committing a crime…

After he was released, he was invited to both Google (where he met Sergey Brin) and Facebook. President Barack Obama called him an inspiration for kids who want to study science and invited him to the White House. Time magazine named him in its list of “30 Most Influential Teens of 2015.”

But that was all then. Now, it’s time for the legal action. After no charges were filed against him and he finally got his clock back, attorneys for Ahmed and his family have written to both the city of Irving and to the Irving Independent School District and made demands.

As the Dallas Morning News reports, the letters ask for $10 million from the city and $5 million from the school district. They say he was “publicly mistreated.” They say he suffered “severe psychological trauma.”

Why This Stupid Confederate Flag Debate is Stupid

The Confederate flag should not be praised by the government and it should not be banned by it either. There’s nothing inherently wrong about the flag but it has been used for bad causes, giving the symbol a negative connotation. Thus the answer is the first sentence of this paragraph: Government is right to not endorse its use and hippies are wrong to blanketly demonize its use.

There. I solved your stupid non-problem.

How did I accomplish such a marvel? Behold, the rudimentary use of facts + situational reality. Tada!
The truth is that the flag is used as mind-numbingly ignorant symbol of un-american attitude of separation, segregation, hate, ignorance, and bad ideas in general, but also — none of that… Because the other truth is that it’s used as a legitimate symbol of history and heritage without any racial connotations whatsoever.


Dukes of Hazzard stuff is now banned due to history revisionism about the Confederate flag in the past week.

I think “pride” in the flag, or any other exclusively regional symbols, is dumb. But who cares? You’re dumb for caring. Or more likely, just ignorant. I’ve been interrogating Confederate flag supporters for over a decade trying to understand why any toolbag dummy would embrace it and while I disagree with the rationale I always receive, it’s not fair to lump the common arguments in with bigots, haters and truly evil people that include murderers and violently wicked humans.
Most often I hear displayers of the Confederate flag talk about pride in history. Which would be fine, except that history is about a war that caused an obscene amount of death that was largely over a dispute regarding the allowability of the ownership of human beings as property. and it lost. So… you’re telling me you’re proudly representing a period of historical bloodshed in the name of legal enslavement of humans that caused immense suffering and negative historical repercussions despite being an ultimate failure because….your family tree at certain points in history lived in the geographical area in which this horrible event took place? Are you THAT friggin tribal and stupid?

That’s *my* reaction at least. even though I know some of it is fairly dubious, such as the more ambiguous role that slavery played in the Civil War. My position on that has always been that yes, the war was about slavery, but yes, it is factually accurate to note the real-life conflicts of the issue and reason there was a separation attempt and ensuing war.  But despite acknowledging the nuances of the historical record – the fact remains that slavery was AN issue if not THE issue and since it’s immoral – why would you want to fly a flag that went to war to defend against encroachments into that immoral institution?

It shows you the heart of anti-americanism in the Hippie mind when they call Confederate Flag wavers racists but defended the fighters in Iraq with the emotional relation appeal trope, saying “what would YOU do if Iraq invaded YOUR city?”. So to some dummies, it’s only okay to fight and murder encroachers into your immoral bondage of innocents if you’re not American. To everyone else – we think that regardless of the prudence of resuming the Iraq war of the 90s again in the 2000s, that like the south in the Civil War – the people defending their state were resisting forces that are there to make things better for everyone. So yes we get why they feel put upon – they’re jerks. What jerk loves to be corrected or told they have to follow the same rules of decency as everyone else? Why would you lionize a losing team that fought in protection of a thing you recognize is bad?

It seems painfully obvious to me but the response I get to this reaction raises some points, not all of which are illegitimate. Bearers of the flag always tell me that no, they are not celebrating the causes of the war or it’s goal, but yes they are representing their geographical location and that that area of the globe and heritage, losing side or not – regardless of the immoral reason behind it – was the center of a lot of death and horror that people suffered through, not all of which because they were adamant supporters of slavery. I think geographical representation is dopey, but no one else does, so if you don’t think it’s horrible to feel a sports-team style kinship with your state, then there’s no reason to do so in a collection of states.

And that’s all the confederate flag is. The problem is not what it *is*, it’s what it *can be*. And it *can be* a symbol of racism, “white pride”, pro-slavery, and any other number of subsets having to do with unjust separation of races. This is why there is a conservative and liberal divide over the issue: Liberals see things in black and white (despite liking to think of themselves as doing otherwise) and thus anything that they view as possibly racist IS racist and unless it is exterminated it is contributing to “racist culture” which a large government must remedy by force. Conservatives, being less collective and more individualistic, see things more individually and draw generalizations from patterns instead of starting with a blanket rule with which to retroactively apply to everyone in all time periods. It’s how Hillary Clintons and Barack Obama can get away with being firmly against re-defining “marriage” to include same sex unions just 3 years ago but now act like only Hitler would ever say such a thing. Likewise with the flag, people selectively choose at what time a trending buzz about the meaning of a symbol dominated and retroactively apply it to all time. Only when it’s politically expedient to try to marginalize it’s opponents as bigots in order to gain power does the Left suddenly realize a position or symbol is unjust. Many people go along with it because following the herd on an issue is most natural when there are emotional appeals involved that don’t motivate resistance or opposition research. Everyone else points out the group think of the herd and is perplexed that people are actually just going along with the history revision that the flag unequivocally means horrible things. Never mind that that unequivication is brand-new (causing awkward blind-eyes to have to be turned about that time Governor Bill Clinton commemorated the Confederacy Star in the Arkansas flag or that campaign supporters for both Bill in 1992 and Hillary in 2008 distributed completely non-controversial Confederate Flag promotional items).


Source 


Source

In the reality of cold-hard-facts, there isn’t anything actually wrong with the flag. It’s not a synonymous symbol with racism or hate or the KKK – it’s a symbol of region of the country during an event that happened that was a massively big deal, forever affecting the country and what it is and what it stands for and thereby affecting world history in a major way. Remembering that with visual representation is not a bad thing. Yes, one has to deal with the fact that haters, racists, and the official organization of the KKK cult do in fact use that flag in all of those bad ways. They fly it not because they give a fig about remembering an event or because they’re such southern-state pride-ists that they want to display a symbol of their home – they see that flag as a symbol of a glorious event in where brave men gave their lives for the noble cause of keeping the negro in chains where they belong. Since that association isn’t a direct parallel, the problem becomes “what do we do when a symbol is co-opted?”.

As with every case where a symbol is used by a group, the rest of us have to decide how to respond. The Republican party is represented by an elephant. That doesn’t mean Democrats can’t enjoy a nice National Geographic special on pachyderms. Gay pride is represented by a rainbow. That doesn’t mean we forever have to associate rainbows and rainbow colors exclusively with homosexuality. The reason is because the factual reality is that groups don’t own symbols that pre-existed them. The sociological reality is that people associate things with what is familiar to them.

There are dumb reasons that are no more dumb than reasons of history and pride that aren’t objected to, and no we shouldn’t give in to any one group claiming exclusive representation to an image or symbol (and especially not if it’s a co-opt to a bad idea like Racism), but who cares?

The whole non-issue and it’s debate is stupid. The people acting like it’s a big deal whose repealing will have any affect over anything positive whatsoever are being dumb and the people who act like the importance of proud display over it is a big deal whose act is accomplishing literally anything positive whatsoever are being dumb.

My diagnosis: Stop being dumb.

Repeat after me:
The Confederate flag should not be praised by the government and it should not be banned by it either. There’s nothing inherently wrong about the flag but it has been used for bad causes, giving the symbol a negative connotation. Thus the answer is the first sentence of this paragraph: Government is right to not endorse its use and hippies are wrong to blanketly demonize its use.

The Protestors Who Brought Down Boston Interstate Are Predictably, Hippie Losers

Earlier this month a bunch of dumb hippies who have been both ingesting and perpetuating the brainwash that pushes victimhood mentality on dark skinned racial minorities decided that it was about time they did something about race relations between white police officers and people with dark skin so of course they chained themselves to barrels to block traffic on the interstate.

The sarcasm in the “of course” part in that sentence speaks both to the illogic bizarreness of the act and the completely routine and cliche predictableness of hippie protest, which is not so much to argue a point or raise awareness in any kind of constructive manner but rather is to throw a tantrum for attention so the participants feel good about themselves. Tools.

Protesters who said they were trying to call attention to racial oppression blocked traffic on Interstate 93 north and south of Boston Thursday morning. The actions surprised police, snarled the commute for thousands, and forced the diversion of an ambulance rushing a car crash victim to a Boston hospital, State Police said.

The narcissistic tantrum accomplished nothing but the addition of more negativity to people in the areas days but as is the case with all stunts like this, could have gone much worse as it blocked the path of not only innocent civilians commuting and generally trying to just go about their day but also an ambulance trying to save a mans life.

An ambulance carrying a car crash victim with life-threatening injuries had to be diverted Thursday morning because of protests that shut down parts of Interstate 93, officials said.

Self absorbed, non-productive, annoying, destructive, and accomplishes nothing. 

Could these people be any more cliche? Turns out the answer is yes… They could be dirty looking dreaded white dudes who still live with their enabler parents…

To cleanse the palate, via Joel Pollak, nothing says “blocking ambulances for social justice” like white-guy dreads. This makes twice in the span of four days that our worst stereotypes about liberals were magically vindicated, the other being John Kerry rolling out his favorite hippie troubadour to serenade France with an apology on Friday. As with celebrity deaths, these things tend to happen in threes, which makes me wonder what sort of show Obama might be preparing to put on for us tomorrow night during the SOTU. Maybe he’ll use the speech to dump on “American Sniper”? That’s the bleeding edge of left-wing hot takes at this particular moment.

The Zimmerman Witchhunt was a historical event in manufactured outrage

A Florida man has been charged with attempted murder and hate crime after fatally shooting an African American man in the head. He expressed disbelief over his arrest, telling officers that he “only shot a nigger.” That mans name is Walton Henry Butler and if the allegations are true, he obviously deserves a lot of scorn from the public in addition to his hopefully lifetime jail sentence.

Instead of being targeted by activists however, race-baiters are collectively going after a made-up charge of racism in a different Florida shooting in where a hispanic man shot a single bullet, allegedly in self defense from having been attacked and suffering a brutal beating by a teenager. Despite no evidence of racism being involved in the shot that resulted in the alleged attackers death, he is being lionized as a martyr and the shooter is being demonized as a racist.

The prosecution is going big with the “taking the law into his own hands” angle.

Judge Debra Nelson issued her ruling over the objections of Zimmerman’s lawyers shortly before a prosecutor delivered a closing argument in which he portrayed the defendant as an aspiring police officer who assumed Martin was up to no good and took the law into his own hands. “A teenager is dead. He is dead through no fault of his own,” prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda told the jurors. “He is dead because a man made assumptions. … Unfortunately because his assumptions were wrong, Trayvon Benjamin Martin no longer walks this Earth.”

There is literally zero evidence that Trayvon Martin is dead because of “assumptions” that were made because, while there is zero evidence that Zimmermans single shot was based on suspicion or taking the law into his own hands but rather was a legitimate use of self defense against an attacker who evidently assumed it would be a good idea to violently assault someone who had a legal firearm on them.

George Zimmerman called the police to express concern about a “punk” he saw suspiciously roaming the eves of other peoples houses and attempted to talk to the individual. Trayvon Martin called a girl friend and mentioned annoyance about a “creepy ass cracker” he saw watching him. Juan Williams:

George Zimmerman faces life in jail as a jury considers second-degree murder charges against him for killing 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. But thanks to the media he is already sentenced to life in the American public’s mind as a racist. NBC edited a tape of Zimmerman’s call to police as he was following Martin to make him appear to be focused on Martin’s race. The New York Times has referred to him in unique racial terms as a “white Hispanic.” The terminology was necessary to have the story fit into a well-worn news narrative throughout American history from the Scottsboro Boys to Emmett Till to Rodney King – the black victim of white racism. Hispanic people can be as racist as black or white people in a country with a deep history of racism. But, apparently for the Times, Zimmerman’s whiteness was important. It fit their good versus evil tale of a white racist killing an innocent black man.

This is a stunning case of media malpractice in fomenting hatred in service to an immoral and divisive agenda. There is absolutely nothing special about this unfortunate case that merits such media attention and making up details in order to fluff it up to justify the undue attention is some crazy propaganda-conspiracy shit unfitting of this Great Republic.
As I saw someone post on Facebook:
My prediction: George Zimmerman will walk on all charges, and appear in the next season of Dancing With the Stars alongside America’s favorite diabetic, Paula Deen. Then maybe (video courtesy of the Washington Free Beacon)

Poor people dance for tourists

The report from the Guardian says that “Andaman Islanders ‘forced to dance’ for tourists” but I don’t see any forcing going on here. Unless I’m missing details about this that aren’t present below, it seems to me that any outrage over this is due to guilty-racism (the type of racism a person has but feels guilty about). If these were poor Russian boys and girls dressed in their regional garb dancing for tourists I don’t think there would be any outrage.

The Jarawa tribe have lived in peace in the Andaman Islands for thousands of years. Now tour companies run safaris through their jungle every day and wealthy tourists pay police to make the women – usually naked – dance for their amusement. This footage, filmed by a tourist, shows Jarawa women being told to dance by an off-camera police officer

Graham Crackers are Racist

This week in Texas Christian University news: A student government candidate named Graham was told by school admins that his nickname was racist and couldn’t be used, forcing him to put tape over his campaign signs. Who knew that running for Vice President of external affairs would get so…um…racial.

TCU Calls Graham Cracker Signs Offensive: MyFoxDFW.com

“Hi my name is Graham, like the cracker,” he said.
That’s how McMillan has been introducing himself since high school. It’s even how his friends know him.
“And he was like, ‘I’m Graham, like the cracker, McMillan.’ And he did it so people would remember his name. That’s how I remember him,” said Taylor Slack.
After McMillan put the catchy addition to his name on his campaign posters he got a call from his student advisor.
“That it could be deemed derogatory and had been derogatory. And, I just taped it over,” he said. “TCU provided me with some blue tape so I could cover it up, which was very nice. And, I ran out so I thought why not spice this up a little bit and make it a little more pop. I got some yellow tape in there and found some flames and decided to put that on there too.”
Other students on campus said they understand the word cracker can sometimes have negative racial connotations, but in this case it doesn’t seem harmful.
“I thought since his first name was Graham it really wasn’t a problem, you know,” said Emma Altgelt.
Some of the signs no longer have tape on them. McMillan said that’s because some students have told him they’ve taken it upon themselves to remove it.
He said he’ll likely continue using his favorite catch phrase for introductions with friends.

Read more on myFOXdfw.com: http://www.myfoxdfw.com/dpp/news/110111-tcu-calls-graham-cracker-signs-offensive#ixzz1ctcTCj3u