Example Kevin Powell

So last week I discussed the events in DC as a reflection of the twisting of Dr. King's vision. In it I mentioned that essentially the tables have been turned where black people have been given much leeway to do things that were considered " racist"done to them. I'm going to give an example of this. Before that though I want to bring the reader's attention to a comment made in an article in City-Journal:

The jurisprudential consequences of believing people merely because of the category into which they fall are obvious; but the radical feminists failed also to notice how auto-dehumanizing and demeaning to their own sex was the demand to believe a woman qua woman, inasmuch as the capacity to lie, dissemble, exaggerate, fantasize, and remember wrongly is inseparable from being fully human.

This also applies to black people. The misunderstood embrace of the idea that one cannot be "racist" without having [supreme] power is just as dehumanizing (and infantilizing) of black people as it is when referring to women. If black people cannot be "racist" then black people are not fully human. If we cannot form and act on the same prejudices that we accuse white people of harboring and acting on then we are not fully human. If we are not fully human then we either believe ourselves to be superior to white people, in which case we believe in black supremacy (evidence notwithstanding) or we believe in black inferiority.

Pick one. Can't have both.

So let's get to Kevin Powell. City Pages has a clear example of how out of control some black people, particularly of the left type, are.

Powell also has a history of violence. He assaulted women in college and once shoved a girlfriend into a bathroom door. Now he’s a sophist of male fragility, and an essential component of his activist repertoire is to engage in public reflection—usually with equal parts self-effacement and self-righteousness—upon this personal shame.

Keep this in mind. Powell makes his living performing and reflecting on his abusive past. He reacted the following:

“You are being a hypocrite. How can you present a message via dance on sexual violence, but knowingly choose to marry an admitted woman beater?!”

It continued: “Kevin Powell admits that he can relapse into violence. Don’t be deceived and trade your safety for someone who can assault you.”

Now how would a man who spends his time allegedly atoning for his past abusive behavior react to this message? Well aside from scouring Google to find the alleged sender and pouncing upon the wrong person, he wrote:

Two weeks later, Powell crafted a blistering 1,200-word open letter response, signed jointly by his wife. It read: “For you, as a so-called progressive White woman, to think it’s okay to send a note like that to a Black woman, about her relationship with her Black husband, speaks to a kind of racist privilege and racist condescension deeply steeped in the history of this country.”

The couple called Sellers sexist for thinking she knew another woman’s journey better than herself and accused her of committing “a form of violence.”

. “We are sharing this response widely, across various communities in Minnesota and nationally because we feel people like you are dangerous.”

Mind you the original letter never mentioned race but here's Powell talking about race? Why? Because he needed it to be about race. This is a disease that afflicts many black people. They cannot imagine life without racism and therefore look for it everywhere. Every negative incident must have a racial angle. Secondly, you'll note how Powell takes it upon himself to instruct the alleged "progressive" white writer on how she can and cannot speak to or about black people. This is a frequent occurrence in "progressive" circles. They deem to tell you what you can and cannot speak on based on genitalia, color, etc. rather than on whether one has actual data to back up what one has to say. It was this attitude that started my long walk away from left ideologies. "Sisters" tell me what I cannot speak upon because I wasn't female. Really?

But fare more telling about this e-mail from Powell was that he wasn't contrite about the actual subject of the letter. You'd think someone who is allegedly atoning for his abusive past would make a point to discuss how he wasn't a threat to his wife and how she (his wife) accepts the "danger" and they have agreed to work together on his issues and that he would hope he can earn the writer's respect.

See, such a comment would have shown a humble Powell who was working on his own demons. Instead, he showed that his need to have power over a person (or people) has simply been transferred from his wife to, apparently, white people at large. The leopard didn't change his spots, he merely changed his dietary choices.

If you read the article you find that Powell had accused the wrong person and caused great harm to his victim. What was his reaction when this was revealed?

“My life is modeled after Gandhi, Dr. King, people who gave their lives to our country. That’s what I do,” he’d say later in defense of his and his wife’s inattention to Sellers’ pleas.

“Regardless if we had proof or not, what we do have proof of is the historical reality of being a person of color in America and having people talk to you in any kind of foul way and thinking it’s okay, even in the state of Minnesota that’s supposed to be liberal and progressive.”

There would be no apology. No correction. And no telling who’d received the smear. [my underlines]

Again, this is a common defect of many lefty black people. We excuse our bullshit by talking about being "black in America". Like I said before: let's bring back segregation so that these negroes can know what "being black in America" used to be like. But more disturbing is the total flagrant disregard for the truth.

So Ghandi, well he didn't actually like Africans so..., and King were against facts and truth? Nice to know. In court:

Each laments how the situation has been blown out of proportion. They assert they did nothing wrong; they genuinely thought they had the right April Sellers. They denounce Rohan Preston as more or less an Uncle Tom—a reporter lying to protect his job at a white institution.

Oh, ruin someone's life because you thought they were racist towards you is not a big deal. And the usual "Uncle Tom" accusations.

Sellers’ attorney has only to summarize the basic elements of the case—that Powell and Parker told a lie, that they did it without basic fact-checking, and that the lie had serious consequences. His statement takes about 10 minutes. Powell plugs his ears with his fingers the entire time

How old is Kevin Powell?

Neither apologizes to Sellers.

This is the black left. They don't have to apologize for being wrong. Just move onto the next.

“I also need funds for a possible and absolutely necessary appeal,” he writes. “Here we are in a majority White city and state, Minneapolis, Minnesota, two Black folks from New York City, going up against a White woman with an all-White jury. You can only imagine our trauma around this situation.”

I think we should ask the question. If the Powells are so concerned about being "two black folks from New York City" in a "Majority white city and state", then why did they move to such a location? Seriously. Why not move their black behinds BACK to NYC? Or move to Detroit, Baltimore, St. Louis, etc.? Because the Powells, like many of their ilk like to live off the fat of well run and maintained white majority locations where they can guilt trip gullible and low self-esteem whites into pandering to them.

Rare Footage of Black Town in Oklahoma

"I Do Not Know..."

I'll keep this one brief. I don't say much about the Mueller witch hunt investigation because I'm old enough to remember the Ken Star witch hunt investigation. Ken Star was appointed to find out about the Clinton's involvement in the Whitewater affair. However; all he got was Clinton lying about getting head from Monica Lewinski. There was a whole circus around this. Essentially These "special prosecutors" end up indicting people for activities related to the actual "investigation" rather than the alleged wrongdoing they were appointed to find.

The Mueller witch hunt investigation is the same thing but on super duper steroids fake weights and an electric motor in the crankshaft. Because if this was actually an investigation of "collusion", then the Clinton camp would be indicted already because it is already known that they actually "colluded" with a foreign agent, created a fake document which was then used to get the FISA court to approve an investigation of a candidate running for president, Person 1. Presenting false information to a court is a crime. We also have Clinton destroying evidence vis-a-vis her destroyed server and deleted e-mails, which is a crime called "obstruction of justice". That these activities go unindicted and untried is all we need to know about the nature of this witch hunt investigation. And really you don't need to be a Trump fan to see this. If you or I presented a court with a fake document in order to further our own cases, we'd be tossed in jail (or at least fined heavily). Why should those involved with the "pee dossier" get away with that? If you or I destroyed evidence while we were being investigated for a crime, we would be arrested. Why should Clinton receive different treatment? But that's another discussion for another day. Roger Stone is in a cell, or at least a holding area (assuming no bail has been made as of this writing) in part because he apparently told a witness to say "I don't know" while being questioned by Congress.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that if this is true, then Stone did in fact cross a line and should be prosecuted for it. What I don't get is why he instructed anyone to tell THAT particular lie. When you say "I don't know" you are making a declarative statement that you "have no knowledge". Anyone with a relatively high IQ knows that the statement you make when you do not wish to disclose your knowledge of a particular thing is:

I do not recall.

See, no one can say whether you recall or not. It is something that cannot be proven at the time you said it or at any time after. You can "not recall" something one minute and "recall" it the next. Until our courts are set up with real-time brain reading devices, such a statement cannot be proven false. However; once you say "I don't know" or in the case of the referenced character, "I don't know any godfather." then you're making statements that can be proven to be false or contradictory to previous statements

Advice for those in Trump's circle, less movies, more law.

Bring Back Segregation

So I've been doing the "pro-black" thing since 1990. I'd say 1989, but to be honest, it was 1990. That would be 29 years. I mention this because I was/am continuously annoyed at how once Obama became the Democratic nominee for president, a whole lotta people who back in the 1990s didn't want anything to do with that "black shit" or that "um-foo-foo shit" or that "kunta kinte shit" all of a sudden were "all black everything". On the other side were people who were equally "on that black shit" for years suddenly became OK with imperialism, global war against non-white people (ahem..Libya) and Obama could say and do no wrong, whereas previous presidents were the racist heads of the white supremacy system. In other words, the masses got fake "woke" and the previously "woke" went comatose. I bring this all up because recently Rep Hakeem Jeffries said that Trump was the Grand Wizard of the White House. This kind of hype speech has become all too common among the "fake woke" who, from their utterances haven't cracked a book on slavery or Jim Crow. This brought to mind a spoken word piece called "Bring Back Segregation"

See there was a time when US presidents actually supported actual Klan rallies in DC:

When you know this, regardless of what you think of Trump, it would not even cross your mind to think "Grand Wizard".

But this doesn't just apply to Jim Crow era references, it includes the common "Nazi" and Fascist" claims regularly made by the fake woke. They have no idea what Nazi Germany was like for its victims. They have no idea what it's like to have government agents running up in their homes to take them away for public pronouncements against "dear leader". If they did, these words would not fall out their mouths.

But today we live in a country where people live in extremes. If they are inconvenienced then it's a major disaster ("horrifying" or "terrifying" to use the terms of left type publications). So yeah, some people need to be time traveled back to when the situations were actually bad rather than complain about First World Butt Hurts.

Chinese Colonialism in Africa

Remember that the primary reason for Europe cutting up Africa was to get resources for the "mother countries". Add to this the brain drain to Europe and the Americas and Africa is double screwed.

Reflections On A King Day

I haven't written anything for King Day for a long time because generally speaking I have come to the conclusion that the people talking about King and his legacy, particularly the "I Have A Dream" speech, don't really believe in it. Today's meditation will be an example of this hypocrisy.

During last week's March for Life a group of mostly white, Catholic, MAGA hat wearing students took a trip to DC to participate. At the end of the trip, while they were waiting for their school bus they were verbally accosted by some "Black Hebrew Israelites" who among other things called them the result of incest and told one black student to "Get Out". That was a reference to the flick where white people bid on black people's bodies in order to live longer (and in some cases fulfill alleged sexual fantasies of white women). The student made famous by the widely circulated video said that in response they decided to do their school cheers. At that point a group of Native American people who had also been doing some sort of protest decided to move towards the boys while beating their drums. One of them got right into the face of one of the MAGA hat shod student and banged his drum directly in his face. During that time the Native American told the student to "go back to Europe".

When news of this broke, it was the Catholic school boys who were vilified and lied on as aggressors. Media personalities, left and right piled on about how those boys were the epitome of White Supremacy being inculcated in the next generation. How they had no respect for elders, etc. ad-nausea. As a result the families, having been doxxed received death threats. Even the school buckled and threw their students under the bus rather than at minimum saying that they were investigating and had nothing to say until all the evidence was in.

It is fitting that such an event happened so close to MLK day. Because it highlights the turnabout in racial actions that has happened in America since at least late 2015. Whereas in the past it was black people trying to go about their day without being harassed we are at a point where non-whites can harass whites (particularly males) with near impunity. And of course with these being children, that is the new low. And as indicated it's not just race. Gillette recently released an advertisement that insults men (who presumably are the target customers). The APA released a paper saying that masculinity is toxic. Etcetera. Etcetera. Et...cetera.

Going back to the kids though. Some are thinking that simply being a Trump supporter or wearing a MAGA hat is insulting and indicative of bad character in and of itself. Of course this is no different than saying a black kid in a hoodie must be a criminal but that's another topic, eh? In the video, those MAGA wearing students showed more character and restraint than the people who were against them. If that hatred of all things Trump makes one fail to notice that, then maybe the real "hater" or hate filled person is looking right at you in the mirror. Take today to think on that.

Why "Evangelicals" Support Trump Despite His Failings

Some time ago I was listening to the Steve Harvey show and they were discussing how they couldn't understand how Christian people were supportive of Trump. Their position being that Trump as so immoral and had broken so many Christian rules that it was impossible to square being a Christian and a Trump supporter. I'm going to address the question here with a recent example from CNN in reference to Karen Pence:

(CNN)Karen Pence, the wife of America's vice president, Mike Pence will be teaching art at a Christian school in Virginia that bans LGBTQ children and requires employees to declare their religious beliefs. Like a real-life setting for "The Handmaid's Tale," Immanuel Christian School insists applicants initial a pledge to "live a personal life of moral purity."

Given that homosexuality is an explicit sin in the Bible, why does it need stating? Furthermore given that the US Constitution not only explicitly enforces the natuaral right of citizens to freely exercise their religions it also explicitly states that there are to be no religious tests for office holding. So then if one is supportive of so called "American values" as stated above, there is no controversy or even anything newsworthy of what Karen Pence decides to do with her time and what values she holds and lives by.

This language is disgusting and insults millions of taxpaying American citizens, many who have served their country. That it is acceptable to the wife of the man who is a heartbeat away from the presidency should horrify and alarm all Americans.

"disgusting and insulting"? Well maybe to you. It's actually not "disgusting and insulting" to millions of people who hold the exact same opinions who are also "taxpaying American citizens". Furthermore, what is actually "horrifying" (why do liberals use this kind of language all the time anyway?) is that someone who purports to be concerned for the welfare of "taxpaying American citizens" is so willing to throw away the free exercise rights of a citizen and their right to participate in the political sphere simply because some other Americans don't like what religious views they hold and exercise. That's "horrifying".

For all their professed beliefs, Pence, and his wife, show unwavering support for a man who has been married three times, divorced twice, has had five children with three women and who has been accused of (though denies) paying a porn star and a Playboy model hundreds of thousands of dollars to conceal affairs he'd had with them.

Yes. The Donald certainly has many moral failings. So why would Pence among other evangelicals support him? First answer by CNN:

It comes down to this: If the Pences love their God so much, then they would not sit in a White House with a man who shows no moral compass and said he never asks for forgiveness. They would be on the White House lawn, with the King James Bible in hand, disavowing a President who is a horrible representation for our children.

And WRONG.

The very answer as to why millions of evangelical Christians support Trump is because Trump has supported their right to freely exercise their religion in private and in public. The end years of the Obama administration were direct attacks on "Christian" values: Support of transexuals. Support of homosexual marriages and the use of the state to enforce these preferences including threats. The same Trump that has supported Christians has also said he didn't care what bathroom Bruce Jenner used at Trump Tower. In other words Trump is not concerned with forcing his beliefs or non-beliefs on Christians. As he shoud NOT. Thus he protects the interests of evangelicals to be free from government interference. That is why Trump has their support. When CNN, Steve Harvey and the rest understand this and stop supporting politicians and companies that attack Christians then Trump will lose his support for the same reasons brought up by CNN.

And so long as companies like Netflix get away with programming that in the recent past would be a crime called endangerig the welfare of a child, the support for Trump type politicians will grow in many quarters not located in NY or California.

No White Man In Sight, Dead Black Girl Out Of Mind

I was particularly bothered when a high member of Black Lives Matter said that "black on black crime" wasn't "a thing". Particularly when more black people are killed by other black people every 3 to 5 years than were lynched in the entire "lynch era" of the United States. How callous and uncaring one has to be to not even acknowledge the dead black bodies simply because no white person was involved.

So here we have Jazmin Barnes. Dead. Shot due to mistaken identity by two black males. When questioned it was said that the shooter was a white male with blue eyes>. I was immediately put off by the commentary about blue eyes. Blue eyes are a recessive trait. A low number of white people have natural blue eyes. A large number of people with blue eyes have contacts in. As a matter of fact, blue eye contacts are one of the most popular colors.

Blue eyes are genetically recessive, and therefore much less common worldwide. Blue eyes are formed by the absence of pigments in the eye, where the blue color is formed by the scattering of light as it's reflected off the iris. While blue eyes are less common than brown eyes, they are frequently found from nationalities located near the Baltic sea in northern Europe. It's estimated that approximately 8% of the world's population has blue eyes.

8%. World wide.

So I thought that it was highly unlikely that whoever was responsible actually had blue eyes.

The media and the usual suspects went on and on about how this incident, unsolved and unproven, was "yet another sign" of racial tensions. And Trump was at fault for that. Certain celebrities pledged monies for funerals and the like.

Then the real killers were found after a tip was sent in. The killers were black. The guy in the red pickup was, at most a witness to the event.

And soon thereafter Jazmin Barnes was dropped from news coverage in favour of the white girl held in a house by a white man.

The sad thing about this, aside from yet another dead black person was that the sense of normalcy when the killers were found. Oh it was a black male drive by. Seen that, been there. Nothing unusual. The thing is that these kinds of tragedies happen all the time and celebs rarely put on a show of support to these victims of black violence. But as that leader of BLM said: "It's not really a thing."

I hope one day that black people wake up to how they are being used and manipulated by the media to see white people as the cause of all their problems and issues. No. We free. We choose. We are responsible.

Not Getting Paid Due To Govt. Shutdown? Blame Dems

I'll keep this brief:

Only a fool. A damn fool did not see the government shutdown coming. Last year when Trump signed the last long term budget that failed to fund "his" wall (millions or people voted for Trump due to his promise of The Wall so it's their wall as well), Trump said that he would never sign another budget like that again.

Democrats crowed about how they didn't give Trump shit and, if I recall correctly, they even poison pilled that budget such that no funds from that budget could be used for a border wall. They were tee hee-ing and guffawing at how The Donald was a shit negotiator and how they rolled him.

Now he's keeping his promise and not signing "anything like that again" and being pilloried for it. If someone tells you they will punch you in the mouth if you "say it again" and you "say it again" and get punched in the mouth do you act surprised? No? You knew the deal and ran your mouth anyway. Same thing applies here. Dems rolled Trump last time. They told their base that The Donald was a paper tiger, or that Mueller would have him out of office and they failed to take the threat seriously and now millions(?) of federal employees are facing economic hardship.

It's very tempting to blame Trump for this. Of course if you are partisan, then Trump is to blame. I'm not partisan. Trump could have done this last time. He compromised, "bigley" last time. Federal employees got paid last year because Trump backed down. By all "fairness" it is the Democrats turn and they are failing. Hence the shutdown.

In the end both parties are dug in. The Democrats have gone all in on obstructing and removing Trump while Trump is appearing to keep both his oath of office (that protect and defend) as well as campaign promises. Any compromise is going to make party bases somewhat unhappy. But that's negotiations. But this all could have been avoided had Democrats taken Trump's statement seriously.

Rwanda Bans Skin Bleaching Products

From AlJazeera:

I see these products in the stores and it breaks my heart. I remember when I first noticed African women who's faces were way lighter than their necks or other body parts. I was unaware of the use of bleaching products and I thought it was makeup. In the past I had seen many very dark women who put on white base makeup which made their faces look entirely different from their necks. Often these were very attractive women who, in my opinion, had ruined their faces with that makeup.

While banning a product may "help" in that they will not be available, the real issue is the reason why these products are being used: The belief that their skin color is bad.

Just consider how bad this stuff is. Those florescent bulbs you buy in Home Depot? They don't want you to break them or dispose of them in your regular trash because it contains mercury. Yet these women will put this on their bodies regularly.