This missive, unlike most of the others I've written, is quite the bitter pill for me to swallow. It signals a realization I was dreading to admit was happening. Some of you would call me a patriot, some would say a nationalist and still others would characterize me a jingoist. Whatever the moniker I am eventually attached to, I am saddened by recent events to the point of losing hope that we, as a nation, will ever be able to realign ourselves with a common belief in right and wrong. A common understanding of what is good for our nation and what is not. Not since a civil war that threatened to tear our nation to pieces has the level of divisiveness been as high. Once again we are thrust into a chaos that could easily set our country ablaze with hate and distrust.
What follows is how I interpreted two very different events that may or may not be defining moments in our history. I watched as these two events unfolded, unrelated on their surface but in my mind they seemed connected in a nebulous way as if tied by slender, almost invisible threads I will relate the first as dispassionately as I can.
If you haven't already heard the flap and furor surrounding the proposed mosque and Islamic center mere blocks from ground zero, then you may want to stop reading now. I'm not too sure you'll see the odd little connection that I saw. Like many who opposed it's construction, I questioned the motives of the Imam who became it's most visible spokesman. I questioned his reasons and his ability to understand any objections that might arise. It was an openly provocative site that was chosen from an openly provocative religious leader who had said that America was "complicit" with the evil behind 9/11. Adding to that, saying that Osama Bin Laden was "made in America" leaves a reasonable person to ask: Why there? Why now? I would never seek to deny anyone seeking religious freedom the right to do so. What I would ask is for a little sensitivity to the location, the radical offshoot of the religion responsible for the carnage and his previous statements to be clarified, if not apologized for.
My objection stems from a simple concept: This is hallowed ground. This is a moment from our past that will live forever in the minds of everyone who still feels proud to call themselves an American.
Those who support the building of this structure site anti-religious bias, small minded thinking and a general hatred for Islam as the reason for the uproar. Let's leave aside the fact that people from both sides of the political aisle both support and object the mosques construction. Both Harry Reid and former governor George Pataki are against it. Conversely, Nancy Pelosi and Orrin Hatch support it. Suffice to say that there's more than enough argument to go around for both sides.
Fast forward a few weeks and we come to the looming rally, sponsored by Glenn Beck, called "Restoring Honor". As beck explained, the rally was meant to provide a renewed focus on our ability as a people to recognize those traits that first made this country a beacon of hope and freedom across the world: Honor, Duty, Sacrifice, Spirituality and the marvelous appreciation for innovation that made us a powerhouse in the fields of medicine, technology and business. The date chosen for his rally was August 28, 2010. His original choice for a date was 9/12 but that fell on a Sunday and Beck, a devoutly religious man, found the idea of asking Americans to ignore the sabbath distasteful and counterintuitive to his ultimate message : Without a firm grasp on religion as our foundation, we are doomed to fail in the promise of our founders.
His next choice for a date, owing to preparation time, security concerns and allowance by the parks service for the event, fell on 8/28. This also happened to be the 47th anniversary of Martin Luther King's "I have a dream speech".
When the left learned about the date he had ultimately chosen, they cried foul and said that Beck, a man with questionable motives, would sully the King name and ruin the date forever. While Beck is always outspoken and provocative, he promised that the rally would be about restoring honor and not be a political event designed to foment disharmony. To his credit, he lived up to that promise with only a few mild but passing mentions of politics. The event was uplifting, with the feel of an old fashioned tent revival with the concept of living up to our founders desires for the nation they gave us as the spiritual connection for all to be enjoyed.
The right, by and large, said a man (Imam Rauf) with questionable motives and a penchant for saying hateful things should be denied his rights based on dishonoring the memory of an historic event. His beliefs are anathema to what the event stood for.
The left, by and large, said a man (Glenn Beck) with questionable motives and a penchant for saying hateful things should have his rights denied based on dishonoring the memory of an historic event. His beliefs are anathema to what the event stood for.
Neither side saw the hypocrisy of their own statements. Neither side could understand the reasons for all the objections. Neither side has any credibility left in my humble opinion.
In all this, the left has used it's standard tactic of calling anyone who disagrees with them haters, fear mongers and outright stupid for not being enlightened enough. To their credit, the right has at minimum agreed with the Imam's right to build his mosque but simply asked for compassion and understanding in his choice for the site and the date for ground breaking: 9/11/2011. Ten years to the date of that horrible tragedy. I didn't hear anyone on the left agree that Beck should have his rally, it is his right as an American citizen to gather for a peaceful demonstration. He demonstrated compassion and a reverence for King's message and legacy.
When we can no longer agree to apply our first amendment rights equally across the spectrum of political ideology, then King's dream has truly died. Content of character no longer matters. All that matters now is the belief that: what I want is right, what you want is wrong, therefore you must be squashed and made irrelevant.
The saddest part of this tragedy lies just below the surface of all this. King's dream officially died when a black man was president.
Thursday, September 2, 2010
Sunday, July 18, 2010
The Equality Principle
In recent days, I've watched as Martin Luther King Jr.'s dream gets dashed to pieces on the rocks of political correctness. I've watched as the media that covered the historic events he took place in and inspired, bravely turned a blind eye towards the destruction of that dream. While it's true that I was very young at the time the civil rights struggle was finally seeing it's goal of equality being met, I've spent the years reading about it and trying to come to grips with why it took so long to happen. Why so many deaths, threats and so much hate could stop the inevitable and the just ends to the struggle. King's death in 1968 was merely the tipping point at which the country could take no more. People of all races and nationalities could see what we could not. I will forgo my urge to point out that most of the detractors to the Civil Rights Act were Democrats like Robert Byrd, former Kleagle for the Ku Klux Klan, and Albert Gore Sr. and simply say that despite the hardships it was a mighty victory for all mankind. No other country had ever fought itself to make all men free and equal.
Fast forward to 2010 and it seems that all that Dr. King and his brave followers fought and died for has been subverted. Hijacked by a political party to justify fear-mongering and spread discontent amongst Americans. The struggle of the 60's has been morphed by Progressive ideology into meaning something vastly different. Equal rights has changed to equal results in modern times. Equal justice has become social justice, a darkly vague term that seeks to sound good but has unsavory connotations when expounded upon.
No government can guarantee equal results except through totalitarianism. Socialism is a fine idea on paper but when administered by men, weak and flawed as they are wont to be, it becomes the nightmare that was Stalinist Russia. It's often said that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. The same is true of the concept of equal results.
This is where the Progressives have led the civil rights movement to. A fictional utopia where everyone of all races can live together free of hatred and injustice. Sadly, this simply is not possible due in large part to the ultimate failings of the human condition.
Let me stray back to my point and provide a little background.
During the 2008 election, two men, King Samir Shabazz and Jerry Jackson, stood outside a Philadelphia polling place hurling racial epithets at white passersby. Both are members of the New Black Panther Party and Shabazz was clearly seen on video brandishing a nightstick while proclaiming, "You're about to be ruled by the black man, cracker."
Charges were filed with the civil rights commission and it seemed a slam dunk case on the surface. The video was clear and the charges justified. In 2009 however, the justice department abruptly dismissed the case much to the dismay of J. Christian Adams, lawyer for the DOJ.
He later claimed publicly that there was a clear mandate that the DOJ would not pursue black defendants in matters of civil rights violations.
If true it casts a cloud of doubt over the justice system that could have enormous repercussions throughout the entire Federal Government. Imagine it, the civil rights commission dismissing a clear violation based solely on skin color. The very antithesis of what it stands for. Civil rights are for all people, not just black people.
Some of Shabazz' previous comments on issues of race are widely available online, in his own words, he "hates white people" and thinks that blacks should "kill you some crackers" and they should "kill some of their babies". Hateful words from a hateful man, predisposed to violent confrontation and revolution, as opposed to King's message of peace and love for all mankind. Opposite ends of an ideological spectrum that spans a scant 50 years.
History has taken King's message of hope and turned it into a commodity, to be sold and traded like so much chattel. King's belief that one day his children would be judged by the content of their character, rather than the color of their skin has been perverted into a system of thinly veiled "payback" for so many years of abuse and injustice.
If the equality that King sought meant only to pay for an egregious sin with another sin, then that does more to set back the dream of civil rights for all than any stupid sign carried by some great fool at a Tea Party Rally. The perceived racism of the Tea Party and its recent denigration by the NAACP says less about the Tea Party than it does about their vocal and often, virulent, detractors.
I suppose in the end, equal rights truly means everyone acting like brutes who see hatred as a sport and use fear and intimidation as tools of the trade.
Fast forward to 2010 and it seems that all that Dr. King and his brave followers fought and died for has been subverted. Hijacked by a political party to justify fear-mongering and spread discontent amongst Americans. The struggle of the 60's has been morphed by Progressive ideology into meaning something vastly different. Equal rights has changed to equal results in modern times. Equal justice has become social justice, a darkly vague term that seeks to sound good but has unsavory connotations when expounded upon.
No government can guarantee equal results except through totalitarianism. Socialism is a fine idea on paper but when administered by men, weak and flawed as they are wont to be, it becomes the nightmare that was Stalinist Russia. It's often said that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. The same is true of the concept of equal results.
This is where the Progressives have led the civil rights movement to. A fictional utopia where everyone of all races can live together free of hatred and injustice. Sadly, this simply is not possible due in large part to the ultimate failings of the human condition.
Let me stray back to my point and provide a little background.
During the 2008 election, two men, King Samir Shabazz and Jerry Jackson, stood outside a Philadelphia polling place hurling racial epithets at white passersby. Both are members of the New Black Panther Party and Shabazz was clearly seen on video brandishing a nightstick while proclaiming, "You're about to be ruled by the black man, cracker."
Charges were filed with the civil rights commission and it seemed a slam dunk case on the surface. The video was clear and the charges justified. In 2009 however, the justice department abruptly dismissed the case much to the dismay of J. Christian Adams, lawyer for the DOJ.
He later claimed publicly that there was a clear mandate that the DOJ would not pursue black defendants in matters of civil rights violations.
If true it casts a cloud of doubt over the justice system that could have enormous repercussions throughout the entire Federal Government. Imagine it, the civil rights commission dismissing a clear violation based solely on skin color. The very antithesis of what it stands for. Civil rights are for all people, not just black people.
Some of Shabazz' previous comments on issues of race are widely available online, in his own words, he "hates white people" and thinks that blacks should "kill you some crackers" and they should "kill some of their babies". Hateful words from a hateful man, predisposed to violent confrontation and revolution, as opposed to King's message of peace and love for all mankind. Opposite ends of an ideological spectrum that spans a scant 50 years.
History has taken King's message of hope and turned it into a commodity, to be sold and traded like so much chattel. King's belief that one day his children would be judged by the content of their character, rather than the color of their skin has been perverted into a system of thinly veiled "payback" for so many years of abuse and injustice.
If the equality that King sought meant only to pay for an egregious sin with another sin, then that does more to set back the dream of civil rights for all than any stupid sign carried by some great fool at a Tea Party Rally. The perceived racism of the Tea Party and its recent denigration by the NAACP says less about the Tea Party than it does about their vocal and often, virulent, detractors.
I suppose in the end, equal rights truly means everyone acting like brutes who see hatred as a sport and use fear and intimidation as tools of the trade.
Friday, April 30, 2010
The Week In Review: Arizona cracks down, liberals crack up and political correctness just cracks.
My, my it certainly has been an interesting week has it not? The resulting media blitz surrounding Arizona's tough, new immigration law has brought the raving loonies out of the woodwork. Armed with emotion but with very few facts, even Al Sharpton has committed himself to righting the wrongs this new law will inevitably inflict on poor, unsuspecting immigrants.
Make that illegal immigrants. Let's not forget that one vital component of this discussion. It seems that many of the most vocal opponents to Arizona's right to self determination have lost sight of that annoying, uncomfortable word. Illegal. There's a nasty part to the truth of the argument from the left and the media as to the ultimate constitutional questions that arise when a state finally tires of promises and acts to serve it's citizens. Now, for those of you who will counter with the argument that while 70% of the people might want to legalize drinking and driving, it does not follow that it should be so. Remember that Obama proceeded with heatlthcare reform legislation and passed it with less than a 50% approval, it does not follow that it should have been passed. Talking point one has just been nullified.
In the interest of brevity, I will refrain from much of the hooplah and circus like atmosphere that permeates the evening news and save my own analysis of the state of things in Arizona for another time. For the time being at least, Obama has taken immigration reform off the table to let the anger from healthcare simmer down a bit. Besides, he's got an awful lot of Democrats to get elected in November. Harry Reid and Barbara Boxer in particular are in for nasty re-election fights despite the anointed one's personal campaigning for both.
In a brilliant strategical move, the Obama administration waited a full 8 days before making any sort of move about containing or even minimizing the oil spill from a rig that exploded on April 21st. Since last Thursday, almost every government agency has committed manpower or resources to examining, meeting, assessing, documenting and assigning blame as quickly as possible to avoid being thought of as not quite on the ball about the environmental and financial impact of the 5,000 barrel a day spill. Luckily, even Eric Holder at Justice has dispatched teams of lawyers to apparently question the oil and build a case for a lawsuit against it. Who knows. Maybe his guys were bored of talking nice-nice with terrorists and needed a little distraction.
The only real question that remains is...how long before we get a photo op with either the President or his wife wearing gloves, wiping the oil from a dying bird.
George Stepanopoulus asked the question, "Do you worry that this will be your 'Katrina'" I can answer that question George, the President is busy fomenting hatred and fear of anyone who makes too much money. Of course there's no danger that this will become another 'Katrina' type problem...because you and your fellow leftist robots in the media won't LET it become one. You'll rally around the "dear leader" and help to minimize his risk to the scandal. In fact, he's counting on it. Now be a good boy George and talk about how good things really are in America right now.
Elsewhere, the young scalawag who hacked into Sarah Palin's email account was found guilty of obstruction of justice and unauthorized access to a computer, but was acquitted on a charge of wire fraud Friday to the delight and the cheers of...well, no one really. I'm sure Mrs. Palin and her family were happy but you might not know about it if you're not on her Facebook fan list or you don't have access to The Drudge Report, sorry you folks in the Senate.
A topic close to the Arizona situation for just a moment. Have you notices how many Democrat politicians and media types are comparing it to (gasp) Nazism? Everywhere you turn there's someone talking about "showing your papers, please" in relation to their new immigration law. While it may sound innocuous, it does smack of using the fear of Fascism to denigrate a specific group of people, in this case, those who favor stronger immigration laws. For the record, Americans, whether naturalized or native, are required to carry certain forms of ID on their person to prove who they are. Even as a citizen, I am required to show my "papers" in so many situations throughout a single week and yet I've managed to remain out of a gulag. However, legal immigrants are required by law to carry their green cards or proof of immigration status on their person at all times. It's how we track them after all. We give them an official ID and all we ask is that they keep it handy to hold down on the confusion. The next time any of you are asked by a law enforcement official to show your license or proof of insurance and registration, just tell them that you have the ACLU on your side as you drive away. Let me know how that turns out for ya.
On happy note, it seems the tenets of political correctness are beginning to fray around the edges just a little. All the push back on the immigration issue has many Americans finally speaking their minds and being honest about the basis for the problem. This is a good sign. It's a sign that while you may want to call someone visually impaired because they cannot see, they are still blind. If you want to talk about immigration, you have to acknowledge that the problem is not with immigration, it's with illegal immigration. You also must admit that it's time for someone, including a state legislature, to finally DO something.
Make that illegal immigrants. Let's not forget that one vital component of this discussion. It seems that many of the most vocal opponents to Arizona's right to self determination have lost sight of that annoying, uncomfortable word. Illegal. There's a nasty part to the truth of the argument from the left and the media as to the ultimate constitutional questions that arise when a state finally tires of promises and acts to serve it's citizens. Now, for those of you who will counter with the argument that while 70% of the people might want to legalize drinking and driving, it does not follow that it should be so. Remember that Obama proceeded with heatlthcare reform legislation and passed it with less than a 50% approval, it does not follow that it should have been passed. Talking point one has just been nullified.
In the interest of brevity, I will refrain from much of the hooplah and circus like atmosphere that permeates the evening news and save my own analysis of the state of things in Arizona for another time. For the time being at least, Obama has taken immigration reform off the table to let the anger from healthcare simmer down a bit. Besides, he's got an awful lot of Democrats to get elected in November. Harry Reid and Barbara Boxer in particular are in for nasty re-election fights despite the anointed one's personal campaigning for both.
In a brilliant strategical move, the Obama administration waited a full 8 days before making any sort of move about containing or even minimizing the oil spill from a rig that exploded on April 21st. Since last Thursday, almost every government agency has committed manpower or resources to examining, meeting, assessing, documenting and assigning blame as quickly as possible to avoid being thought of as not quite on the ball about the environmental and financial impact of the 5,000 barrel a day spill. Luckily, even Eric Holder at Justice has dispatched teams of lawyers to apparently question the oil and build a case for a lawsuit against it. Who knows. Maybe his guys were bored of talking nice-nice with terrorists and needed a little distraction.
The only real question that remains is...how long before we get a photo op with either the President or his wife wearing gloves, wiping the oil from a dying bird.
George Stepanopoulus asked the question, "Do you worry that this will be your 'Katrina'" I can answer that question George, the President is busy fomenting hatred and fear of anyone who makes too much money. Of course there's no danger that this will become another 'Katrina' type problem...because you and your fellow leftist robots in the media won't LET it become one. You'll rally around the "dear leader" and help to minimize his risk to the scandal. In fact, he's counting on it. Now be a good boy George and talk about how good things really are in America right now.
Elsewhere, the young scalawag who hacked into Sarah Palin's email account was found guilty of obstruction of justice and unauthorized access to a computer, but was acquitted on a charge of wire fraud Friday to the delight and the cheers of...well, no one really. I'm sure Mrs. Palin and her family were happy but you might not know about it if you're not on her Facebook fan list or you don't have access to The Drudge Report, sorry you folks in the Senate.
A topic close to the Arizona situation for just a moment. Have you notices how many Democrat politicians and media types are comparing it to (gasp) Nazism? Everywhere you turn there's someone talking about "showing your papers, please" in relation to their new immigration law. While it may sound innocuous, it does smack of using the fear of Fascism to denigrate a specific group of people, in this case, those who favor stronger immigration laws. For the record, Americans, whether naturalized or native, are required to carry certain forms of ID on their person to prove who they are. Even as a citizen, I am required to show my "papers" in so many situations throughout a single week and yet I've managed to remain out of a gulag. However, legal immigrants are required by law to carry their green cards or proof of immigration status on their person at all times. It's how we track them after all. We give them an official ID and all we ask is that they keep it handy to hold down on the confusion. The next time any of you are asked by a law enforcement official to show your license or proof of insurance and registration, just tell them that you have the ACLU on your side as you drive away. Let me know how that turns out for ya.
On happy note, it seems the tenets of political correctness are beginning to fray around the edges just a little. All the push back on the immigration issue has many Americans finally speaking their minds and being honest about the basis for the problem. This is a good sign. It's a sign that while you may want to call someone visually impaired because they cannot see, they are still blind. If you want to talk about immigration, you have to acknowledge that the problem is not with immigration, it's with illegal immigration. You also must admit that it's time for someone, including a state legislature, to finally DO something.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
