News: Birth of a Racist
- If you don’t like your black neighbor because you have a personality clash, you are a racist.
- If you complain about a black clerk in a store because she wasn’t helpful, you are a racist.
- If you oppose affirmative action, you are a racist.
- If you disagree with a black President’s ideology and disapprove of his policies, you most definitely are a racist.
- If you are a juror in the Trayvon Martin case and find George Zimmerman not guilty, you must be a racist. Heck, the entire system that acquitted Zimmerman is racist. Those shots were fired not out of self-defense but because of racism. And we know that, because Trayvon was black and Zimmerman white.
On top of all this, some in the public — MSNBC, loonies on the left, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and the minions they have summoned to protest — want us to further restrict the self-defense laws that protect all of us in these situations.
This means it would be even harder for you to shoot an intruder or rapist or pedophile when protecting yourself or your family. This means people will hesitate before coming to the aid of a neighbor or being a Good Samaritan. This means when someone robs your store at gunpoint, you have to succumb to injury or death. This means when your daughter or son is raped, they must yield and never fight back because self-defense will no longer be available to them.
This would be a return to the lawlessness of the Wild West where anything goes and your only justice is revenge. Call it feudal, barbaric, mob rule or lawlessness: either way, it is the unraveling of the criminal justice system in America and a giant step back for mankind.
Do we really want to throw the self-defense baby out with the racism bathwater?
Now that I am a racist, I see things more clearly and realize all of this can trickle into every aspect of our lives. White people will be increasingly afraid to speak their minds and will be concerned that their interactions with other races might come back to haunt them one day because, anything we do that negatively impacts a minority must be rooted in hate. Thus:
- If a Hispanic man cuts me off on the highway and I flip him the bird, I flipped him off because he is Hispanic, not because he was a jerk and cut me off — making me a racist.
- If an Asian waitress has a lousy attitude, provides rotten service and I decide not to tip her, I withheld her tip because she’s Asian, not a lousy waitress who didn’t earn her tip — making me a racist.
- If a black doctor amputates the wrong limb on my body and I sue him for malpractice, I targeted him because he is black, not because he is an incompetent doctor who harmed me — making me a racist.
- If a Native American breaks into my house and puts my family in fear for our lives and I whack him on the head with a vase and he dies, I killed him because he is a Native American, not because he put our lives in jeopardy and I acted in self-defense — making me a racist.
Is this the future we have to look forward to? Where every move we make has to be weighed against the ethnicity, race, religion or sexual orientation of the other guy?
As we are forced to introduce race into the verdict calculation, I wonder if the black men who said “This is for Trayvon” and beat up a white jogger, will be charged and prosecuted for a hate crime and be tarred as racists in the press and court of public opinion? How will the Sharpton minions insist on treating the black man who pounded a white woman in the face when, confronted with a mob of protesters, she rolled down her window to ask them to let her car pass as they needed to get her granddaughter to the hospital?
I understand that I am a racist. But, aren’t we all racists now?
Ga. immigration law challenge now over
The order from U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Thrash means Georgia law enforcement agencies can ask people to prove their legal status if they are detained for suspicion of an unrelated crime.
In December, the judge lifted a preliminary block and allowed authorities to start enforcing the so-called “show me your papers” provision.
His Friday order dispenses with the case altogether, though the action doesn’t prevent future lawsuits by a person who might claim an unconstitutional search-and-seizure.
Thrash cited a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on a similar Arizona law that justices said was not on its face unconstitutional and a subsequent 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that the provision at issue would “be construed in a way that creates a conflict with federal law.”
What is striking in this history is the manifest hand of providence in the work of redemption. God is a God of long-range planning. He does not succumb to the all-too-human tendency toward immediate gratification and short-term goals.
God sees the end from the beginning and rules the course of history, moving it inexorably toward its appointed destiny. In the affairs of the life of Abraham, God was providentially directing history toward David’s kingship and far beyond to the kingship of Christ.
The genealogies show that the first advent of Christ was not an afterthought in God’s mind, a sudden quick-fix remedy for a world run amok. Rather, it displays a marvelous drama of redemption that God ordained before the foundation of the world and gradually but surely brought to pass in the footnotes of history.
All who rejoice in the first advent are comforted by the certainty of the promised second advent. We, as twenty-first-century Christians, live in an interim period—the time between two advents that define, condition, and redeem the meaning of our lives.
But if we Hope for what we do not yet have, we wait for it patiently. Rom 8:25
by Ed Driscoll
A century of “Progressivism” reaches its logical end point.
The George Zimmerman case has nothing to do with race and everything to do with promoting the communist agenda. This is the same tactic the Three Pillars of Propaganda (media, academia & the DNC) uses to solidify their base and move their agenda forward. This is their coming together behind a feigned outrage like Global Warming so people who believe in communism will rally around their latest victim and happily give up their freedoms to a more powerful and tyrannical gummit god.
In this case they are getting their pound of flesh from a Black/Hispanic with a Jewish name who has light complexion as a sacrifice to their god of equality. The race industry has brought all of its power to bear in an attempt to give the Black community a sacrifice in lieu of jobs and success. This industry led by Jessie Jackmail and Step-n-Fetch Sharpton has not only failed to move the community forward, but has made their lives more impoverished and miserable so they will distract them with a feigned outrage ploy. None of the leaders really care about this kid getting himself in a situation which killed him they are only interested in promoting their careers and the agenda of socialist slavery for America.
This is the same tactic they use for abortion, environmentalism, vilification of banking, oil, auto, stock markets, open ranges, guns and every other object they declare evil. The only difference is that race is one of the foundations of these methods of political warfare. The way it works is you find an evil you need to fix and explode it into a national crisis. Then you make general statements and have your Three Pillars declare your version the truth and build a consensus so that everyone who disagrees with you is an extremist when in reality your position is extreme. In this case if you are for a fair trial and saying the accused is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, you are a racist when in actuality you are open minded and treating everyone fair under the law.
Once you marginalize your enemy by making him a hater and dehumanized then you can promote your agenda as the consensus agenda. In this case you increase the level of hatred and anger so the Blacks will further hate the Whites and when the elections come around they will vote with the DNC as a way to get back at the Whites. You are seeing there is no innocence or guilt to this trial, he is guilty since the consensus said he was guilty before the first piece of evidence was produced and now there is a need to have the man lynched to satisfy the groupthink. The consensus has to be satisfied so they can promote their agenda on every other level from healthcare to welfare making this the communist utopian society they crave.