This video is based on a recent editorial by Joseph Farah, founder and publisher of WND.com.
Rush Limbaugh rightfully characterizes MSNBC’s singular focus as racism.
Newt Gingrich appeared on MSNBC’s “Hardball” with Chris Matthews the other day and refused to play by the rules.
Two Atlanta-area high school choruses are being denied a spot performing with the Atlanta Symphony Orchestra, presumably because there are too many white faces in them.
Reports quote a spokesperson for the school system saying virtually that. He explained that symphony administrators told the schools “that their choruses are not diverse enough” and would be replaced with a “more diverse chorus.”
Using the word “diverse” twice in one sentence must make any liberal smile. The left feels diversity is of far more importance than merit, as this case clearly demonstrates.
The symphony’s president stated he is surprised there has been any backlash about the decision, noting he just wants to reflect “the diversity of Atlanta.” Once again, Caucasians know they’re getting the shaft when they hear the D-word.
He confirmed that the symphony allowed the two schools to perform four years in a row, describing them as “marvelous” and adding that it was time to give some of the other high schools “their chance to perform with the ASO as well.”
Equality of outcome outweighs equality of opportunity on the left, another illogical liberal tenet reflected in this decision. All of the 12 eligible schools presumably had equal chance to try out for the open spots, but this official thinks the only fair decision is to punish the primarily white choruses and give an unearned spot to the more racially diverse groups.
Not only does this line of thinking dissuade practice and hard work in reaching for a goal, it insults the groups that did make it, essentially telling them they are not good enough but they have the right look. Since when did a chorus’ look trump its sound?
If diversity for diversity’s sake makes for a better chorus, I say let’s take that logic to the basketball court, where the top performing participants are overwhelmingly black. Of course, this will never happen; as affirmative action shows, diversity is only needed when it benefits a minority.
Photo credit: wstera2 (Creative Commons)
It is nice to listen to voices like those of Mr. Colin Flaherty and Jesse Lee Peterson.
We here at Western Journalism don’t mean to be politically incorrect, but…
The so-called “Unfair Campaign” sponsored by the (obviously) liberal University of Minnesota-Duluth has recently rolled out a series of ads emphasizing the many ways it says white citizens enjoy too many benefits because of their skin pigmentation.
Using Caucasian pawns with messages scribbled across their faces, the campaign tries to promulgate the tired narrative that America is run by, and for, whites. Or, as Obama prefers to put it, “White folks’ greed runs a world in need.”
One of the forces behind this affront to actual racial issues deserving of discussion is Tim Wise, who in an open letter following the 2010 mid-term elections wrote violent, contemptible threats toward white conservatives.
“You’re on the endangered list,” Wise, himself white, wrote. “And unlike, say, the bald eagle or some exotic species of muskrat, you are not worth saving.”
This kind of helpful commentary is common on the left. Spewing ad hominem attacks in an attempt to bring down the object of ridicule is a predictable move for liberals instead of focusing on positive efforts to actually assist those they feel deserve it.
Have minorities been considered an underclass in this nations history? Certainly. In 2012, though, with a self-identified black president and countless high-profile “minorities” accomplishing anything they work hard enough for, the only move do-gooder liberals have left is to further demonize the majority race.
The Unfair Campaign’s slogan is absolutely insulting.
“It’s hard to see racism when you’re white,” posters state, putting Caucasians on the defensive as though their only choices are to, a) agree with the campaign’s entire argument or, b) concede they cannot recognize the supposed rampant racism in this country because of their complexion.
Anyone with a conscience can recognize racism, be it by whites against a minority, by a minority against whites or, in this case, by self-hating whites against themselves.
This further illustrates the liberal predilection for placing people in defined groups rather than celebrating the unique contributions and achievements of the individual.
When viewed as a whole, maybe there is a higher percentage of successful white Americans than certain minorities. Likewise, Indians and Asians traditionally enjoy more success than many other races. Is it because those groups also have an unfair advantage?
There are numerous contributing factors in dictating which individuals, not groups, will be successful. Education, parental involvement, and self-motivation are a few that immediately jump out to me.
The simple fact is that we all, regardless of skin tone, face obstacles in achieving our dreams. But, in America, more than in any nation in the history of the world, we can do almost anything with the proper amount of dedication and discipline. At least until groups like the “Unfair Campaign” are successful in turning segments of the population against each other, stifling the potential of everyone.
Photo credit: terrellaftermath
Rush correctly argues also that Obama has written off the American mainstream.
Liberal white guilt is on full display in this ad that says that white people are unfairly privileged, and suggests that they should feel guilty about it. Talk about hate speech…
Attorney General Eric Holder spoke to a gathering of black church leaders on Wednesday in Washington, D.C., where he told them that voting is a “sacred” right. Where’s the ACLU? Americans United for Separation of Church and State? Sounds like “theocracy” and “dominionism” to me. Where’s Michelle Goldberg? Wasn’t the Attorney General trampling on the First Amendment by mixing religion and politics?
The whole separation of church and state thing is a one way street. It’s only OK for liberals to make appearances before church leaders and speak about a “sacred” right.
It’s too bad that conservative church leaders are intimidated by the claims of liberals and organizations like the ACLU and Americans United. It’s more likely, however, that pastors use the “separation of church and state” myth as an excuse not to speak on political issues, thereby giving liberals free reign to recruit among religious adherents with no blowback from groups the ACLU and Americans United.
Liberal hypocrisy is so rampant that no one is surprised by it anymore. So instead of harping on it in this article, I want to address some of Eric Holder’s legal and logical absurdities that he spoke about in his address to the participants at the Conference of National Black Churches:
“The recent wave of changes to state-level voter identification laws also has presented a number of problems requiring the department’s attention. In December [of 2011], we objected to South Carolina’s voter ID law, after finding — based on the state’s own data — that the proposed change would place an unfair burden on non-white voters.”
Read more at Godfather Politics. By Gary DeMar.
Photo Credit: European Parliament (Creative Commons)