The Thanksgiving lockdown is so convenient

Sometimes we oldsters complain that "kids today" don't know American history as we learned it in the 50s and 60s. But we've learned in 2020 that our elected leaders don't know the history of the 80s and 90s or even the 21st century. A Thanksgiving lock down plays right into the hands of the far-left, cancel culture, kill the sense of national identity and destroy the family game plan. It's like a gift, wrapped with a big bow and delivered by Amazon.

The battle over Thanksgiving and its origins has been going on for at least 40 years. Nasty powerful white Europeans with guns and a foreign religion came and destroyed a benign, peaceful, close to nature indigenous culture. Just google it--the algorithms are all set to find that meme for you in the top 10 listings.

Thanksgiving is not technically a religious holiday, although all religious people understand WHO is getting the thanks. True, it's not called family day on the calendar, but families under any definition or "like family" gather to eat at a table of shared abundance, tell stories, play games and watch football. Marxists can strike their biggest blow--they are anti-religious and anti-family, particularly the nuclear family because those two support the "system" they wish to destroy.

You can read the works of Karl Marx, or Vladimir Lenin, or the mission statement of Black Lives Matter. It's all there.

Black Lives Matter is covering up its Marxist roots

Americans need to understand that BLM founders are Marxists, and even if they take it off their website (where millions have already seen it), the demand to destroy private property, remove religious liberty and dismantle the nuclear family isn't going to go away. They've got a catchy slogan, but it covers up their goals.

https://www.heritage.org/progressivism/commentary/fact-checking-new-york-times-fact-checker-blms-china-links?

Mike Gonzalez is no light weight, know nothing like New York Times "reporters." NYT has met a real researcher/fact checker.

What is Black Lives Matter really about?

Why is it important to know BLM founders are radical, lesbian feminists who announce on their website they are trained Marxists? Marxism is founded on atheism, but the writings of Karl Marx are not unlike a holy book with a catechism. It looks chaotic, but there are rules and regulations, all antitheses of American values.

If you've been asking, "Don't they know they are hurting their own community," or "Don't they know they are strengthening Trump," or "Don't they know this is not the way to correct what is wrong in society," then you are asking the wrong questions. Particularly Christians, always looking for something logical and rational with a message--you should be saying, "What do they SAY they want?"

Easy answer. Violent radicals have been answering that for over 100 years--but too many suckers don't believe them.

EVERYTHING THAT EXISTS DESERVES TO PERISH.

Now does it make more sense? Not just . . . should perish, but DESERVES to perish. Not just bad things, but EVERYTHING. That's why they can move from smashing Confederate statues (cancel culture), to decapitating statues of Mary, the mother of Jesus, and burning churches (cancel all religions), to smash and grab booty from expensive retail stores and Mercedes car lots (cancel capitalism), to claiming your house, car and pension investments as their own (cancel personal property), to denigrating biological differences (cancel nuclear family).

They are not asking for change, or revolution, there is no plan except to destroy what's here now. The future vision and form of government will come later, and that will evolve as many of the people who are fellow travelers, standing silent waving their little posters will need to be imprisoned or put to death.

As you can see in the videos of Minneapolis and Portland, Black Lives Matter has already been taken over by white communists. The staying power and history of American Communists in all its versions (including those called socialist) is much longer and they've had their tentacles in every sector of our society and culture since the 1930s, especially in education and entertainment. But they've been welcome in the White House and in the largest corporations, in most main line churches, and in powerful unions.

It only takes a spark, to get a fire going.

Women manning the barricades of the race riots

During the radical student movement of the 60s (grandparents of the rioters of today), there was a quote heard around the world, in fact it may have launched the feminists into their own Marxist orbit. When asked what was the role of women in the counterculture of those years and that movement, a radical black male leader chauvinist pig (as we called men then) replied, "Prone."

For show (I think), women are in the forefront in the 2020 race and hate riots; the male leaders won't make that mistake again. Women aren't making coffee, although they may be writing the twitter appeals for more willing bodies to show up. And they're making fire bombs and using bats.

There are supposedly three women who thought up Black Lives Matter, the organization, all radical black feminists. Of course, Pew Research took a look at the streets and found an overwhelming number of young, college educated, well-heeled whites, "manning" the barricades of war. I suspect the three women have lost control--at least they didn't raise the billions needed to launch this in multiple cities at once.

BLM is a Marxist Organization

A dialogue is not the intention of BLM, the organization. It is a Marxist group, organized by black radical feminists and now controlled by whites, with the usual shout them down and humiliate reasonable people until they submit.

Got a virtue signaling sign in the yard? Look out. They know the softies. Have you attended a "non-violent protest" in the last few weeks? Honey, you've been had. There are hundreds of examples over the last 100 years on what happens to people who submit. 100,000,000 killed by their own governments.  Fascism and Communism and flip sides of the same coin.  You can’t get a piece of dental floss between them.

These people are totalitarians. They are already taking out the first layer of "liberals" and "independents" who dare to have a non-anarchist opinion, or who question who has taken over the Democrat Party. God help the people who think all lives matter, or who think they have a right to cover the graffiti which BLM and the mayor smeared on city owned streets.

Plessy v. Ferguson and BLM

The SCOTUS decision of Plessy v Ferguson perhaps didn't seem a big deal in 1896. It upheld "separate but equal" but really entrenched Jim Crow, the legal segregation of the races--rest rooms, drinking fountains, seats on trains and busses, housing, and jobs. It took years for SCOTUS to undo that mistake. Much of that progress since integration is now seen as racist and some radicals want to reinstate the separateness for some Americans.

Today #Blacklivesmatter, the organization, is the new Plessy v. Ferguson. To use another example from the past, it's the new McCarthyism. It's not a law, or a court decision, but it's being treated that way by "woke" corporations, CEOs, schools, businesses, and churches. BLM is not looking for "equal" but for privilege and special treatment based on race just like the Plessy decision. The founders of #BLM are radical, Marxist feminists, and as we've learned, Marxism is not about equality, ever. It's totalitarianism with special privilege for a few at the top.

At this time, the new BLM/Plessy v Ferguson is going after Democrat controlled states and cities, because they are the softest target. They have already elected to their local councils, courts and mayoral positions leftists who will toss a bone or two to minorities while passing restrictive environmental (greenish) regulations that hurt them, or raising minimum wage which in the long run cause entry level workers to lose jobs and businesses that hire them to fail. Now those administrations are falling in line with "defund the police," causing more pain and deaths in black communities. BLM are counting on the growing frustration and anger from the people who can't protect themselves for more riots and looting.

Candace Owens interviews Kingface

Two blacks discuss problems with the black culture.  If whites discussed it this honestly, they'd be charged with hate crimes and white supremacy.  He says BLM uses emotions to control Blacks. They get money and support through the death of blacks.  When have they ever saved a black life, he asks. They discuss the death of George Floyd and his nine prison sentences.

 https://www.prageru.com/video/the-candace-owens-show-kingface/

Joan’s opinion on BLM, guest blogger

“The organization calling itself Black Lives Matter has nothing to do with blacks or their lives. They are simply one more instance of a seditious group USING a minority group's legitimate pain to further their own agenda. Thinking people of all colors recognize that this movement is racism at its worst. People who really value black people and their lives are building up not tearing down. People who truly value black lives also value the lives of people of other colors. People who truly believe that black lives matter are offering educational and employment opportunities; they are offering friendship and fellowship in working toward some common good for society. If you really believe that all lives matter and that color of skin does NOT matter, live your life treating all God's children as if they matter - because they DO. What is happening in our nation has little to do with race; it is insulting that this organization thinks Americans can be manipulated in such an obvious way to participate in their own destruction.”

Why didn’t 8 years of Obama fix this?

This is not difficult to answer.

The riots of 2020 are political, and although one white liberal goal had been achieved by electing a Black man who was acceptable to many whites--he had no ties to the African American experience of slavery, the KKK and Jim Crow. All foundations of the Democrat Party. But for liberals, he was the right shade. Not too dark. Even Joe Biden made a reference to how acceptable and "clean" he was. Good looking, well dressed. Haaavaard. Not like street fighter Jesse Jackson who had been running forever, was dark, and didn't speak pretty Harvard English.

Plus, in 2008 he was the most radical, outrageous politician on the abortion issue. Born alive? Let them die. Now that's so common and mainstream Democrat it's hard to imagine it was controversial. It got him the support of white liberal women, even though it created carnage in the black community.

But 8 years of liberal goals didn't achieve the anarchist, over throw the government, goals. And one of those goals was to take over the Democrat party.  What was needed was 3 radical feminists to put their heads together and came up with  Black Lives Matter (BLM). Obama was NOT elected to help black people, he was elected to assuage white liberal guilt. It would take 1) virulent hate for Trump both on the right and the left, 2) an outstanding leap ahead for blacks, and 3) a pandemic to guarantee the weakening of the masses to set the stage.

Did closing the churches contribute to the chaos?

Still thinking about two of the videos I saw on Tucker last night. One was a young white man who was standing alone beaten senseless by a group of young black men, and from the position of his body, I'd guess both arms and legs and maybe his neck were broken. Bystanders did nothing to protect him or stop his assailants. (Sound familiar?) They used ladders, pieces of lumber to bash him. It looked like he was just in the wrong place, perhaps separated from his friends, or maybe he lived in the area. There were many white people in these protest groups who had gone along to get along, thinking they'd show solidarity. All he had done was pull out his phone and supposedly was trying to call the police.

The other was an Asian woman, standing her ground, maybe Korean American, in front of her small grocery. I think she was trying to salvage some produce--her livelihood. Maybe it was paying the tuition for her son who was in medical school. The men beating her were twice her size and half her age. Her husband, or some other man, rushed out and they beat him too.

After the shock of seeing such inhumanity and lust for killing, I began to wonder if declaring churches, libraries, and museums as "non-essential services" had encouraged the greed, hate and thirst for revenge and blood. None of those young men knew George Floyd, and the main threat to their lives up to yesterday has been other black men, not the police, despite what grandma told them, unless they are part of a criminal element like a gang. If it weren't for the schools and TV reminding them daily they are victims of racism, they probably were leading fairly normal lives, until the last two months.

Was it smart for mayors and governors to close sports and entertainment venues? While maybe not essential for spiritual health, they do bind certain groups in society together. Competition and aggression are played out on teams, and aside from the occasional broken bone or brain injury, most just watch the aggression. Men could always talk about sports if they had nothing else in common.

I did see some young women bashing in car windows and harassing the helpless drivers, and maybe they were looting those high end stores in Santa Monica. But for the most part, the blood thirst was 16-30 year old men. Testosterone and youth, not race. Antifa, which is white, both genders and privileged had probably been a little more cagey--placed the bricks and lumber around. They arrived with a plan--anarchy.

And I know that's not an original thought, because I believe I first learned it in a "Sociology of Education" class when I was a sophomore in college. All societies have glue and shared interests, which schools need to encourage, we were told then in the 1950s, which educators promote in the form of athletics, clubs and special interest groups.

Perhaps our political leaders educated in the last 40 years never learned that there is more to creating a function society than race and gender. Unfortunately for us, our enemies knew.

Black Lives Matter explained by a former supporter, by Savvy, guest blogger

Savvy has lived in South Africa where she was a minority, and has bi-racial children, one who appears Caucasian, and one who doesn’t. She was briefly enamored of the BLM movement.  In her journey to Conservatism, she lost family and friends. Sound familiar? Here’s a list of the beliefs she has come to reject.

Belief 1: “IF YOU DON’T VOTE THE SAME WAY AS ME, YOU’RE A RACIST. IF YOU DISAGREE WITH ME ABOUT ANYTHING TO DO WITH RACISM, YOU’RE A RACIST.”

I had deep concerns about the racism of both candidates in the last election. If your side looks glossy white to you, while the other side looks like a pile of bird shit, well, get honest with yourself. Are you

1) using politics as a way to feel superior to other people and then

2) bragging that you are voting for the love of all humankind?

How can you say you’re better than Republicans and that you are loving towards all people? Those two attitudes are incompatible with each other. People don’t vote differently than you because they are bad people. It’s just an ad-hominem attack. Focus on ideas, debunk ideas if necessary, but character attacks benefit only you (and not for very long. They are bad for you, too.). Let’s say, for the sake of demonstration, I don’t think micro-aggressions are always valid concerns, 100% of the time. If you think they are, convince me using research, logic, examples of how they are. There is no way to prove I am not a racist to you if you are determined to think it. But if you are going to call me a racist, I challenge you to prove that I am a racist. If you’re going to attack my character, you should be ready to prove it with demonstrable evidence. If not, your argument is thrown out.

Belief 2: “VIOLENCE IS NOT PREFERRED, BUT PEOPLE CAN’T HELP IT WHEN THEY’VE BEEN IGNORED FOR SO LONG.”

This is the biggest problem I have with BLM. After every violent riot, BLM advocates share a quote by MLK about violence being the language of the unheard. The way they use this quote is dehumanizing. Minorities are just as capable of self control as all people. Having lower expectations for the black community does not raise them to the same level of equality and empowerment that white people experience. I have also been chronically misunderstood and unheard; I do not use my trauma as an excuse to burn random buildings, riot, or assault people I don't even know. Violence is not a tool to convince anyway; it just puts another person on mute. In contrast, respectful debate changes minds. And, no, setting random buildings on fire because you’re mad at another person is not self defense! It’s just being a part of a mob.

Belief 3: “IF YOU ARE NOT SURROUNDED BY DIVERSITY, YOU’RE A RACIST.”

A friend recently told me he was concerned his children would grow up with prejudice because our town is majority white. As the mother of biracial children, this concerned me (My 2 children are ¼ Asian, but one looks lily white and one looks even more Korean than my husband! As the BLM crowd says, one of them “passes for white,” and is “privileged.” Go ahead and throw the family history and heritage out the window to prove a point…). When I was a teenage American living in South Africa, I remember what it felt like when someone said they wanted to hang out with me because they wanted to see what Americans were like. All along, I thought she wanted to be my friend, and then I suddenly had that shock of feeling like an oddity. I never want my children to be used like that at playdates. Passing racism on to your children now looks like selecting your friends because they are black, or just not-white, in the name of diversity instead of liking who they are as a person. If you are a good parent, your kids have good chances of growing up to be decent people who can think through racism for themselves and settle into the belief that every person who has ever been born is equal in the eyes of God.

Belief 4: “IF YOU ARE WHITE AND YOU SAY NOTHING AFTER A MAJOR EVENT INVOLVING RACE IN THE NEWS, YOU ARE EITHER RACIST OR ALLOWING RACISM.”

After every shooting or riot, the constant pull is that you *have* to say something on social media denouncing racism. By now, if you are on my friends list and you don’t know if I’m racist or not, you don’t know me at all. Period. Allow people privacy, to be quiet, to grieve, to think, to process the way they do... Furthermore, it is especially difficult to stick your neck and say something when accusations of racism fly around at the slightest wrong step or unexamined attitude. The practice of denouncing racism nowadays appears to be more about signaling that you’re not a Republican.

Belief 5: “IF YOU ARE WHITE AND YOU ADVOCATE, YOU ARE STILL VALUING YOUR VOICE OVER THE VOICES OF BLACK PEOPLE. LET BLACK PEOPLE SPEAK.”

This belief is in direct opposition to belief number 5, but nobody cares that the Left is wildly inconsistent. White people are encouraged to take a day of silence or just in general not talk too much, because it’s black peoples’ turn to take the mic. Why can’t we all be vocal? The BLM answer is that whites have had the attention for centuries and their voices are more privileged than black voices, so it’s time to let black people take a turn. But any movement that allows a more free society will never silence your voice or anyone else’s. You were created unique by God, your voice is not the same as all white people, your thoughts matter as an individual, not a representative of your race. Free your voice. I owe credit to my friend for teaching me this bit--Any movement that does not empower your voice is not a movement for freedom. If we really want black people to be equal, we must all see them as being UP to the level of freedom, not move whites DOWN to the level of oppression.

Belief 6: “ONLY CERTAIN TYPES OF OPPRESSION COUNT AS OPPRESSION. WHITE PEOPLE DON’T SUFFER AS MUCH AS BLACK PEOPLE.”

Without getting too far into my own personal story, I’ve been diagnosed with PTSD. I’ve gone through EMDR therapy to help my body and soul move out of complex trauma. I do not want to use my story to get ahead in a political debate or prove my point in a way my opponent would look like an asshole for logically refuting me, but so many in the BLM movement (and maaaany other people today) do that with their own stories. They use their wounds as a way to verbally pound someone in a debate, or as excuses to take up actual weapons without the need for self defense. Many people, of every colour, have gone through tremendous suffering and trauma. To you that have, your story of suffering is too precious to use it politically or to one-up others. Guard it and keep it safe from that. If you are tempted to use it that way, focus on what aspect of your heart still needs healing.

Belief 7:  “SINCE WHITES HAVE A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE TOWARDS BLACK PEOPLE, I AM COMPLICIT AS A MEMBER OF THE WHITE RACE.”

Differentiation from my family history was a hard-won battle for me in therapy. I sat on that couch and I sorted out who had done what and what I was and was not guilty of. I am not guilty of the sins of my relatives. Why would I then be guilty of the sins of a few more generations up? Why would I even be responsible for apologizing for something my relative did? I am done carrying the shame of other people’s evil. I am not undoing that difficult healing work any time soon. I am also ¼ Native American. Am I also guilty for the sins of any of my Cherokee and Cree ancestors? Or just my white ones? How does that work?

Belief 8: “NO WHITE MALES NEED APPLY.”

So often, we hear that to “progress” we need to “move into the future.” Has the past taught us nothing? Do we think people made signs like, “No Irish need apply,” or “Whites only,” because they woke up one morning and decided to be a monster? Or maybe they felt there was a good, logical reason for discriminating? Maybe modern day Leftism is just as deceptive. What I do know is that when I look at little white boys and think that people will assume someday that they have an unredeemable character, I know that is discrimination.

 I know that is wrong. So I’ve walked away.

(Posted at the WalkAway website, where former Democrats, progressives, Marxists, socialists, and the totally confused or apathetic, share their stories. )

Critical theory

Let's not be naïve about the Black Lives Matter movement, the Snowflakes seeking safe places so they don't have to hear conservative ideas, the Occupiers of a few years ago, and the anthem protests by millionaires. This is not about ignorance, they don't need to be educated.  It's a form of mind control called "critical theory," and that's just dressing up the so-called educated for a party, Marxism. It's effective in societies that don't have a poor working class to riot like the late 1890s or early 20th century.

Your children's teachers were educated in the 80s or 90s when critical theory was usually just literature and history being "deconstructed," and those people had as their faculty a few years before, the radicals of the 1960s and 1970s who enjoyed the sexual revolution, awakening feminism along with the Viet Nam War protests.

Explaining that slavery existed since the dawn of time, or that free American blacks owned slaves, or that the founding fathers developed a truly revolutionary society unknown to the world controlled by church, kings and dictators, or that one can't change his biological sex, or that capitalism has set millions free from thousands of years of poverty, or that climate has been changing for millions of years is not going to work. (Although I will continue to blog about it.) Not even going to "work" after they leave campus is going to work, because their CEOs and managers have absorbed the same distorted view of history, literature, politics and biology.

The purpose of critical theory (aka Marxism) is to rip apart the fabric of our society--beginning with the family, moving on up through business and employment, and to the government at all levels--your school board, city council, state legislature, the House, Senate, Executive and Judiciary, and yes, the military. And once the movement has stripped everyone under 50 of all their values, beliefs, faith and honor, they stand naked before the firing squad.

Separate and Special

Black Lives Matter, Affirmative action, feminists, transwomen, occupiers. . .

Michael Smith had a good post on Facebook on the history of the legal decisions on separate by equal (and special).

The Supreme Court ended the doctrine of “Separate but Equal” when it handed down the landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education in 1954, overturning the decision on Plessey v. Ferguson on May 18, 1896 that affirmed Louisiana state law mandating “equal but separate”. Homer Adolph Plessy bought a ticket on the East Louisiana Railroad, from New Orleans to Covington, La. Mr. Plessy , seven-eighths white and one-eighth Negro, took a seat in the coach designated for whites on the segregated train. When challenged, he refused to move, he was taken off and jailed.

Reflecting the social and legal environment of the times, the Plessy decision was not even close - the decision was handed down by a vote of 7 to 1 with the majority opinion written by Justice Henry Billings Brown and the dissent written by Justice John Marshall Harlan. This decision established legal segregation by race as the law of the land and it stood for 58 years until society changed and recognized that separate but equal is anything but equal.

Brown v. Board of Education has now been law for 5 years longer than was Plessy (63 years vs. 58). Proving that certain segments of mankind never learn anything from history, the SJW’s (social justice warriors) of contemporary times seek to return to the days of Plessy (with a twist) by working with government to be separate and equal (but special). Blacks are calling for “black only” instruction in college and black only police and government in majority black areas. Muslims are demanding Muslim only public accommodations – the same is true with the LGBT community. Feminists want to be free of the “heteronormative patriarchy” by removing men from their roles in society. The entire “safe space” idea is not just to provide protection for thin-skinned progressive adult children and academics (but I repeat myself) but to exclude people who hold opposing ideas and prevent them from being heard. These folks say they want to be treated as equal but demand to be separated from others and in doing so, they also expect special protection and treatment.

Affirmative action programs were created to “cure” the discrimination created by the “separate but equal” doctrine. These programs created the first classes of people who were separate and equal (but special). The idea was to carve out special privileges for blacks that would eventually help a class of citizens overcome historical inequality. Looking at black America today, it is obviously possible to make the case that black individuals have benefited – but as a socio-economic class, affirmative action can hardly be considered a success - and yet it continues apace.

In 2003’s Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003), SCOTUS upheld the affirmative action admissions policy of the University of Michigan Law School by defining the very quota system found unconstitutional in 1978’s Regents of the University of California v. Bakke as “not a quota system” (a lot like how John Roberts redefined Obamacare’s tax as not a tax and a tax at the same time in order to find Obamacare constitutional). Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, writing for the majority in a 5-4 decision and joined by Justices Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer, ruled that the University of Michigan Law School had a “compelling interest in promoting class diversity.” Never mind that the Constitution says nothing about “diversity” and everything about equality, the important aspect is that Grutter v. Bollinger affirmed the same “separate but equal” doctrine as did Plessy v. Ferguson (with the special twist of approving reverse discrimination).

Progressivism is riddled with self-contradictory ideas and affirmative action is no exception – it seeks to create equality by creating inequality (i.e. lowering standards, mandating quotas, grading on the curve, etc.), proving that Brown v. Board of Education was demonstrably correct – separate is not equal, especially when discrimination is thought to be cured by more discrimination against an out of favor class. Progressivism is built on building protected classes and “curing” their ills by disadvantaging another class. Proving that progressives are the least self-aware class on the face of the American political landscape, this is the basis for the Plessy decision in 1896 making the modern SJW’s little better than the post-Civil War segregationists.

Separate but equal is not equal. Equal but special is not the same as being equal. Separate but equal was wrong in 1896 and progressivism’s doctrine of separate and equal (but special) is just as wrong today.

The evolving narrative

The narrative changes to fit the politics of the racialist pimps. In Ferguson it was a white racist cop and an innocent teen-ager; but then a Department of Justice investigation found nothing criminal and there was no, "hands up don't shoot." Michael Brown had just robbed a minority owned store, and he reached in the policeman's car when being questioned.

Then in Baltimore six police, three of them black, were arrested in the death of Freddie Gray, a black man who died being transported after a struggle; again no evidence to convict and it was clearly a reflexive racial action by Marilyn Mosby, the black female city State's Attorney. The police involved were black, white and one female with a total of about 50 years employment by the city which takes millions every year from the state and federal governments to just stay open and fix poverty. Narrative began to shift--it's not just racism, it's police wanting to kill black people.

Killing the Dallas police is a different story, it was a peaceful protest, and at least some in the Black Lives Matter movement claimed it was justified and in retaliation, but to my knowledge no one has been arrested as the narrative is that police lives don't matter even if protecting blacks from criminal elements.

Then Tulsa and Charlotte. The policeman in Charlotte was black and the one in Tulsa was a woman; so the racist angle was totally destroyed even though Hillary Clinton ran with it, after she urged patience in the NYC bombing until more investigation was finished. Shouting racism is OK; suspecting terrorism is not. 70% of the people arrested during the Charlotte riots are said to have ID from out of state (I haven't checked that figure--just saw a news item). We know the Charlotte conflagration is not grass roots, but who ginned up the hate is not known. It looks suspiciously like a Soros sorry soiree. But now the narrative is changing to it's "pent up rage going back to slavery days and Jim Crow"--and for that WalMart must be looted and Air Jordans stolen. For that another black man who was rioting was killed by another black. Who will put those black families on TV, or doesn't their grief matter?

Meanwhile in the same two year time frame from Michael Brown in August 2014 to Keith Scott in September 2016, statistically we know that twice as many whites were shot by police, most for good cause because they were committing a crime like holding up a small store and fleeing or resisting arrest or grabbing a policeman's gun or something else stupid. And we know from Heather MacDonald's excellent crunching of numbers for her book War on Cops that a police officer has 18.5X the risk of being killed by a black man as an unarmed black has of being killed by police.

 Again, the actual facts do not benefit any black congressman, or president, or attorney general, or Black Lives Matter leader, so the facts will be ignored and more hate will be dumped on police, and more white college students must take mandatory classes on why they are bad people because of their race.

This is Obama's legacy.

Black lives matter group has legitimate issues?

The President gives comfort to rioters and criminals by saying Black Lives Matter protests bring out legitimate issues.  Where do they point out that blacks are victimized by crime 6x more than whites, by other blacks?  Do those lives matter? The violent crime rate for offenders is 8x higher  for blacks than whites (don’t confuse rate with population). He will have trouble convincing me that the claims are legitimate when he’s never defended Chicago’s blacks this way. He also can’t convince me that he has done anything in 7 years to address these concerns.

http://www.progressivestoday.com/obama-defends-blacklivesmatter-and-says-they-must-be-taken-seriously-video/#!

Ferguson and Black Lives Matter, but only some

"The reality is that Michael Brown is dead because he robbed a convenience store, assaulted a uniformed officer and then made a move for the officer’s gun. The reality is that a cop is six times more likely to be killed by someone black than the reverse." WSJ on the phony "Black Lives Matter" movement which will primarily hurt the poor.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/black-lives-matterbut-reality-not-so-much-1441755075