"Acceptable" Racism

“ACCEPTABLE” RACISM: At no time in the past, or the present, would anybody have said publicly that “we don’t need black people running [fill in the blank].” In all the years of discrimination against blacks, nobody would have dreamed of making such a comment publicly because, by and large, discrimination against black people was “frowned upon.” So today, a major liberal figure says, “We can’t have white people running the Dumocrat Party.” I guess the “new discrimination” against WHITE people that liberals are trying to promote is an “approved discrimination.” “White Supremacy” is a new, coined term to make that discrimination acceptable.

I LOVE SAN FRANCISCO: The way it used to be. I haven’t been there for many years since I lived there for some time way back in the nineties. One of the things I liked most was the dependability of the mass transit services. Something that is usually missing in most cities. And the quaintness of many things there, like the cable car system, which most take for granted, and people ride without making a connection to the bus service, the trolley buses, the streetcars, and the like, all supplemented by Bart, their subway system. But liberals have destroyed this city. Their policies have become so obviously bad with the advent of human beings squatting and defecating in the streets without anybody doing anything about it.

IMBECILIC WISHES: Liberals are promising things they can never deliver—for long, anyway. They are now promising a “universal basic income” for all Americans, regardless of whether or not they work. Plus, they promise a job for every American who wants one—IF they want one, which nobody will, if the government will pay them NOT to work. And they’re promising to pay the tuition for kids to go to college so they can be “properly educated (conditioned)." They are promising all kinds of giveaway programs, using “other people’s money.” the question is, how are they going to do this, if everybody gets paid not to work, so there is nobody who works, and thus nobody earning anything they can steal to pay for their giveaway programs? The whole thing is idiotic, but that’s what Dumocrats are promising. That’s why I call them Dumocrats.

GOT IT ALL WRONG: “Ol’ Joe” Biden announced his third run for president, concentrating on the Charlottesville atrocity, where one deranged white supremacist murdered a young woman by running over her with his car. This was wholly apart from the demonstration, where legitimate protesters (not white supremacists) were protesting the idiotic destruction of many confederate statues. There was NO “deadly clash” by opposing demonstrators. Today’s KKK, the Antifa, infiltrated one side and CREATED the violence (it’s what they do) Biden claimed, and the unfortunate death of this woman was NOT a result of the demonstrations, but was because of ONE deranged white supremacist. There WERE “good people” on both sides, but not in the Antifa gang, nor the murderer of that unfortunate woman.

MORE COPS BLACK AREAS: Liberals like to talk about the “fact” that the cops use “more draconian policing” in black areas of town. What “Draconian” means, I’m not sure. But they DO apply more policing in areas where the most crime occurs, especially gun crime. Liberals like to talk about cops killing black men “21 times more often than white men.” Not revealed is the unalterable fact that more black men shoot at cops than do white men, and when they do, they just might get shot. Again, not mentioned is the fact that the guns the black men use in most cases are gotten ILLEGALLY, on the black market, and the anti-gun laws liberals get passed would do nothing to prevent this. Not usually mentioned any time is the fact that in almost ALL cases of a misuse of guns it is an ILLEGAL gun that is used.

ONE MAN’S OPINION: Dumocrats are widening their pressure against “hate speech” beyond “Congresswoman” Omar, saying they don’t want it to be just against her. But as written today, it could be against ANY opposition to liberal practices or policies and should be defeated. ANY measure against free speech, even if it’s terrible speech, is unconstitutional… Professor Michele S. Moses, at UC Boulder, Colorado (of course) says “Higher Education is fully committed to free speech, and Trump’s recent executive order is wrongheaded.” Really, prof? Then why do the prissy little Snowflake liberals all over the place insist on establishing “safe spaces” where they don’t have to hear opposing opinion? Why are there RIOTS supported by the schools to keep conservatives from uttering a word on campus? Why does one former employee at Berkeley think he has the right to slug a conservative because he disagrees with him? Prof, YOU’RE the one who is “wrong-headed” because you refuse to see what’s right before your eyes...

.