Six times as many Blacks are convicted of felonies as compared with Whites relative to their respective populations.
Blacks overwhelmingly outnumber Whites in suspensions and expulsion from public schools.
Over a three year period, when I drove a taxi in Chicago, there was an average of 11 cab drivers murdered per year, making it Chicago's most dangerous job. All of the solved murders of cab-drivers turned out to be Black men.
An overwhelming majority of street prostitutes do not "date" black men because they consider it too dangerous. Even Black hookers will not get into a car with a Black man. Some of these streetwalkers are strictly controlled by Back pimps who also do not allow their hookers to date Black men because it is too risky. They don't want to lose income when their girls get injured, disfigured or killed.
Why are these truths being suppressed? Why are they not taught in our schools as part of African American studies? Why is the danger of the American Black man rarely a topic of news and commentary in the media? Why is this obvious danger rarely portrayed in TV and movies?
How can solutions be found if we ignore the obvious facts?
Attitudes of victim-hood and entitlement are being used to ignore, justify and excuse dangerous behavior.
Instead of setting high standards for all Americans, today's popular culture is encouraging today's youth to sink to the lowest common denominator in order to be cool, popular and to fit in. As a result of celebrating and embracing the negative characteristics of Blacks, all American subcultures are becoming more like America's most dangerous cultural group.
The "great society" programs were just coming of age in the 60's, just after the civil rights movement. The unintended consequences of programs that sought to help poor and minority families actually did them more harm than good. These programs "nudged" many fathers out of their homes and replaced them with welfare, food stamps, aid to "women, infants and children", etc.
The entitlement mentality, coupled with a broken family, has led to a social, moral and cultural breakdown in many black families. More good would come from challenging and encouraging struggling families, rather than sapping their motivation by supporting them on a subsistence level. A saftey net that exists within their families, churches and communities would be more effective than an impersonal government bureaucracy. Government aide leads to resentment and a false sense of entitlement.
Most liberals genuinely hope that their programs will succeed. However, today's lawmakers are very corrupt and view many of these programs as "cash cows" that will increase their own power by putting them in charge of distributing more and more funds.
In the end, the demoralization of the recipients of these programs predictably results in perpetuating fatherless homes, decreasing self reliance and fostering criminal behavior and disrespect for authority, the family, the church and women.
Showing posts with label blacks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label blacks. Show all posts
Friday, October 30, 2009
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Don Imus, Aging Hipster or Racist?
Don Imus is back in the news again with charges of racism leveled against him. This is what he said on the radio:
Wolf: "Defensive back Adam 'Pacman' Jones, recently signed by the Cowboys. Here's a guy suspended all of 2007 following a shooting in a Vegas night club."
Imus: "Well, stuff happens. You're in a night club, for God's sake. What do you thinks gonna happen in a night club? People are drinking and doing drugs, there are women there, and people have guns. So, there, go ahead."
Wolf: "He's also been arrested six times since being drafted by Tennessee in 2005."
Imus: "What color is he?"
Wolf: "He's African-American."
Imus: "Well, there you go. Now we know."
The attack on Imus is wrong on several levels. Since Imus's crack about "nappy headed hoes" last year, Imus went on Al Sharpton's radio show and apologized profusely. He apologized to the the girls basketball team at Rutgers personally. Last fall, Imus got a new radio show on WABC in New York. Imus hired a new staff, including many black people in high paying jobs, for the production of his radio show. On his new show, Imus talked about issues concerning blacks in a typical liberal fashion, portraying blacks as victims in a racist society. He has talked about how police racially profile blacks for harassment and arrest. In other words, Don Imus went out of his way to appease the black activists that he knew were listening to his every word, waiting for a chance to pounce on him for racism. Imus has been walking on eggshells since the Rutgers incident in an effort to appease Al Sharpton and other race-baiters.
The comment Imus made was clearly an attempt at sarcasm, in order to illustrate that Pacman Jones was being harassed and profiled by police because he was black. Of course I don't believe that the police profiled Pacman Jones. Pacman has an extensive criminal history for drugs and violence leading back to his high school and college years in addition to his six arrests since he has been in the NFL. He has been arrested for brawls in strip clubs and violence against women. Don Imus was trying to portray Pacman as a victim of police profiling and also to appease the likes of Al Sharpton.
The greater problem is that Pacman Jones is embraced by so many fans who celebrate the gangster culture that he demonstrates in his personal life. Just like the gangster culture has taken over hip-hop music and the clothing industry, the gangster culture has now become mainstream in professional sports. Many professional athletes have multiple children with different women. They are lauded as "players". They sport hip-hop hair styles and wear gangster like clothing. Look at clothing that men are wearing these days. They are either wearing a sports outfit, often with the name and number of athletes who act like low-lifes off the field, or they are dressing like hip-hop gang-bangers, or they wear a black tee-shirt that displays a negative image and the unsavory name of a band. All three groups are proving to be negative role models.
The celebration of evil in our society is being hastened by the media, arts, sports and clothing industry who are catering to the lowest common denominator in our society. Don Imus is part of the problem. Not because he is a racist, but because he embraces the gangster culture. Imus was trying to be cool, and "hip-hop like" when he used the phrase "nappy headed hoes" to describe girls on the Rutgers basketball team over a year ago. Unfortunately, it is hard for a sixty-eight year old white man in a cowboy hat, to pull this off and still be believable. Had these remarks come from a younger man with baggy pants and tattoos on his neck, notice would not have been taken. In this recent incident, Imus embraces and sympathizes with a criminal football hero who he falsely depicts as a victim of unfair police racial profiling. In both instances (Rutgers' girls and Pacman), Imus was embracing today's twisted popular culture and it was misunderstood as racism.
After the first incident, Sharpton staged token protests against record labels that promote rap and hip-hop music that contain lyrics that encourage drugs, violence and demeaning of women. If Al Sharpton and his ilk truly want to help the downtrodden, they would condemn Pacman Jones and the fans that worship him for his extracurricular activities. They call it "street cred", and it helps celebrities gain popularity. Instead of being rewarded for "street cred", these "bad-boy celebrities" should be condemned and run out of the business. Perhaps that would send a positive message, but that is not likely to happen because the sports industry, entertainment industry and clothing industry, use these misguided celebrities as "cash cows" ready to be milked. There should be rage against what Don Imus said, but the rage is misdirected. Imus should be condemned for coming to the defense of the criminal celebrity, Pacman Jones.
Wolf: "Defensive back Adam 'Pacman' Jones, recently signed by the Cowboys. Here's a guy suspended all of 2007 following a shooting in a Vegas night club."
Imus: "Well, stuff happens. You're in a night club, for God's sake. What do you thinks gonna happen in a night club? People are drinking and doing drugs, there are women there, and people have guns. So, there, go ahead."
Wolf: "He's also been arrested six times since being drafted by Tennessee in 2005."
Imus: "What color is he?"
Wolf: "He's African-American."
Imus: "Well, there you go. Now we know."
The attack on Imus is wrong on several levels. Since Imus's crack about "nappy headed hoes" last year, Imus went on Al Sharpton's radio show and apologized profusely. He apologized to the the girls basketball team at Rutgers personally. Last fall, Imus got a new radio show on WABC in New York. Imus hired a new staff, including many black people in high paying jobs, for the production of his radio show. On his new show, Imus talked about issues concerning blacks in a typical liberal fashion, portraying blacks as victims in a racist society. He has talked about how police racially profile blacks for harassment and arrest. In other words, Don Imus went out of his way to appease the black activists that he knew were listening to his every word, waiting for a chance to pounce on him for racism. Imus has been walking on eggshells since the Rutgers incident in an effort to appease Al Sharpton and other race-baiters.
The comment Imus made was clearly an attempt at sarcasm, in order to illustrate that Pacman Jones was being harassed and profiled by police because he was black. Of course I don't believe that the police profiled Pacman Jones. Pacman has an extensive criminal history for drugs and violence leading back to his high school and college years in addition to his six arrests since he has been in the NFL. He has been arrested for brawls in strip clubs and violence against women. Don Imus was trying to portray Pacman as a victim of police profiling and also to appease the likes of Al Sharpton.
The greater problem is that Pacman Jones is embraced by so many fans who celebrate the gangster culture that he demonstrates in his personal life. Just like the gangster culture has taken over hip-hop music and the clothing industry, the gangster culture has now become mainstream in professional sports. Many professional athletes have multiple children with different women. They are lauded as "players". They sport hip-hop hair styles and wear gangster like clothing. Look at clothing that men are wearing these days. They are either wearing a sports outfit, often with the name and number of athletes who act like low-lifes off the field, or they are dressing like hip-hop gang-bangers, or they wear a black tee-shirt that displays a negative image and the unsavory name of a band. All three groups are proving to be negative role models.
The celebration of evil in our society is being hastened by the media, arts, sports and clothing industry who are catering to the lowest common denominator in our society. Don Imus is part of the problem. Not because he is a racist, but because he embraces the gangster culture. Imus was trying to be cool, and "hip-hop like" when he used the phrase "nappy headed hoes" to describe girls on the Rutgers basketball team over a year ago. Unfortunately, it is hard for a sixty-eight year old white man in a cowboy hat, to pull this off and still be believable. Had these remarks come from a younger man with baggy pants and tattoos on his neck, notice would not have been taken. In this recent incident, Imus embraces and sympathizes with a criminal football hero who he falsely depicts as a victim of unfair police racial profiling. In both instances (Rutgers' girls and Pacman), Imus was embracing today's twisted popular culture and it was misunderstood as racism.
After the first incident, Sharpton staged token protests against record labels that promote rap and hip-hop music that contain lyrics that encourage drugs, violence and demeaning of women. If Al Sharpton and his ilk truly want to help the downtrodden, they would condemn Pacman Jones and the fans that worship him for his extracurricular activities. They call it "street cred", and it helps celebrities gain popularity. Instead of being rewarded for "street cred", these "bad-boy celebrities" should be condemned and run out of the business. Perhaps that would send a positive message, but that is not likely to happen because the sports industry, entertainment industry and clothing industry, use these misguided celebrities as "cash cows" ready to be milked. There should be rage against what Don Imus said, but the rage is misdirected. Imus should be condemned for coming to the defense of the criminal celebrity, Pacman Jones.
Monday, April 28, 2008
New Deal or Bad deal?
I would like to discuss why social programs are not the answer to poverty. They are rarely successful in improving poverty, but good liberals continue to support these failing programs. Whether or not they work is secondary to liberals, the main thing is it makes them feel good by giving to the poor. While alleviating their own guilt, they are actually removing the motivation to succeed from the very people that they are trying to help. Programs offered by liberals are not based on spiritual principles and the hard truths of life. Poverty in America is caused by spiritual poverty. There is opportunity in America for those who are sufficiently motivated to work hard for it.
The crux of the problem is the broken family. Today's popular culture does everything that it can to encourage children not being brought up by their mother and father. An average of 25 percent of children today are born out of wedlock, 70 percent in the black community. Encouraging marriage, and stigmatizing single parents or blended families, will do more for reducing poverty and crime than any social program can. But altruists would consider that mean and judgmental. For them it is out of the question, even though there is a direct relationship between poverty, crime, drug abuse and non-intact families. Unfortunately popular culture celebrates and embraces the single mom, divorce, the blended family and homosexual marriage and casual sex. In an effort to raise the self esteem of children growing up in broken homes, we are encouraging more broken homes by removing the stigma. In this case, by not being judgmental, we feel good about ourselves, while we are encouraging behavior that exacerbates the problem.
It's a lot easier, and it feels a lot better, to give money to the poor and offer heart felt sympathy, rather than to tell them the hard truth and show tough love. The truth is, that money is not the answer and hand outs will only exacerbate the problem. The message should be don't to get pregnant until you're married and can support a family. If you get pregnant before they are married, now is the time to get married, stay married and take responsibility. Families must do whatever it takes to stick it out in the marriage and raise their children together honorably and don't look for handouts. Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps and take responsibility. The only one who I know that tours the country, going to poor neighborhoods to spread this message, is the black comedian and actor Bill Cosby. Cosby has written a book and makes many speeches in poor black neighborhoods preaching personal responsibility. Click here for one of Bill Cosby's inspiring speeches. He is often criticized by the civil rights activists, and black leaders, and many liberals for being mean, uncaring and unsympathetic. Yet Cosby's principles are undeniably successful when applied.
Civil rights activists are always lobbying for more government money, but the ugly truth is that just perpetuates the problem. By removing the economic dependence that the mother and father share with each other, we are increasing the chances of the family splitting up and leaving the children without a father in their home.. Throwing money at the problem of poverty in America just diminishes the ambition of people to reach down into their souls and rise to the challenge, by pulling themselves up.
Of course it wouldn't make a person with an altruistic philosophy feel very good by lecturing poor children on the virtues of work, responsibility, and family. They don't want to here it, they just to give some money and heart felt sympathy. It is human nature to take the easy way out. But the easy way, is not always the best way. Talk of white racism is also bound to get applause, by giving them a scapegoat for the mess that they find themselves in. But anger only distracts them from the solution of hard work, discipline and personal responsibility. But, by giving them handouts to live on, they are deprived of the motivation of doing what it takes to provide for themselves and their families. Worse than that, they lose their honor. Honor can't be bought or sold, it must be earned.
Tough love and altruism are two philosophies that don't work well together. Honor and nobility trumps self esteem every time. There is no honor in doing what you think is right just to feel good, so you can say, "at least I did something". True happiness and honor comes from living right, and making the tough decisions. Often liberals are misled, manipulated and deceived in their search for sense of value, self worth self esteem, popularity, acceptance and happiness. If you remain true to unwavering spiritual principles, it's harder to be fooled, but it is also harder row to hoe. Spiritual progress is usually found in that harder row, in this man's humble opinion.
The crux of the problem is the broken family. Today's popular culture does everything that it can to encourage children not being brought up by their mother and father. An average of 25 percent of children today are born out of wedlock, 70 percent in the black community. Encouraging marriage, and stigmatizing single parents or blended families, will do more for reducing poverty and crime than any social program can. But altruists would consider that mean and judgmental. For them it is out of the question, even though there is a direct relationship between poverty, crime, drug abuse and non-intact families. Unfortunately popular culture celebrates and embraces the single mom, divorce, the blended family and homosexual marriage and casual sex. In an effort to raise the self esteem of children growing up in broken homes, we are encouraging more broken homes by removing the stigma. In this case, by not being judgmental, we feel good about ourselves, while we are encouraging behavior that exacerbates the problem.
It's a lot easier, and it feels a lot better, to give money to the poor and offer heart felt sympathy, rather than to tell them the hard truth and show tough love. The truth is, that money is not the answer and hand outs will only exacerbate the problem. The message should be don't to get pregnant until you're married and can support a family. If you get pregnant before they are married, now is the time to get married, stay married and take responsibility. Families must do whatever it takes to stick it out in the marriage and raise their children together honorably and don't look for handouts. Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps and take responsibility. The only one who I know that tours the country, going to poor neighborhoods to spread this message, is the black comedian and actor Bill Cosby. Cosby has written a book and makes many speeches in poor black neighborhoods preaching personal responsibility. Click here for one of Bill Cosby's inspiring speeches. He is often criticized by the civil rights activists, and black leaders, and many liberals for being mean, uncaring and unsympathetic. Yet Cosby's principles are undeniably successful when applied.
Civil rights activists are always lobbying for more government money, but the ugly truth is that just perpetuates the problem. By removing the economic dependence that the mother and father share with each other, we are increasing the chances of the family splitting up and leaving the children without a father in their home.. Throwing money at the problem of poverty in America just diminishes the ambition of people to reach down into their souls and rise to the challenge, by pulling themselves up.
Of course it wouldn't make a person with an altruistic philosophy feel very good by lecturing poor children on the virtues of work, responsibility, and family. They don't want to here it, they just to give some money and heart felt sympathy. It is human nature to take the easy way out. But the easy way, is not always the best way. Talk of white racism is also bound to get applause, by giving them a scapegoat for the mess that they find themselves in. But anger only distracts them from the solution of hard work, discipline and personal responsibility. But, by giving them handouts to live on, they are deprived of the motivation of doing what it takes to provide for themselves and their families. Worse than that, they lose their honor. Honor can't be bought or sold, it must be earned.
Tough love and altruism are two philosophies that don't work well together. Honor and nobility trumps self esteem every time. There is no honor in doing what you think is right just to feel good, so you can say, "at least I did something". True happiness and honor comes from living right, and making the tough decisions. Often liberals are misled, manipulated and deceived in their search for sense of value, self worth self esteem, popularity, acceptance and happiness. If you remain true to unwavering spiritual principles, it's harder to be fooled, but it is also harder row to hoe. Spiritual progress is usually found in that harder row, in this man's humble opinion.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Obama, the First black President?
I think that race has helped Obama more than hurt him. Many white folks are voting for Obama out of a sense of white guilt or to show everyone how open-minded and progressive that they are. They think that by voting for the first black president that they are proving that they are a good person. Most Obama supporters can not even tell you what his policies are or what his record has been. All they know is that if elected, he will be the first black president.
Obama is a socialist. He wants to tax the wealthy and give to the poor. Just like Karl Marx said ,"from each according to his ability, to each according to his need." This sounds good but it doesn't work because people lose motivation and ambition. Eventually, the class that produces goods and services shrinks, so there is less wealth to go around. As a result, most people become poor and dependent on the Government. Please don't fall for it.
Obama is a socialist. He wants to tax the wealthy and give to the poor. Just like Karl Marx said ,"from each according to his ability, to each according to his need." This sounds good but it doesn't work because people lose motivation and ambition. Eventually, the class that produces goods and services shrinks, so there is less wealth to go around. As a result, most people become poor and dependent on the Government. Please don't fall for it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
