Race Card

‘Charlie Brown Thanksgiving’ criticized as racist

You’re a racist man, Charlie Brown! Critics are slamming ABC’s “A Charlie Brown Thanksgiving” for seating its only black character, Franklin, alone on one side of the holiday table — in a rickety old lawn chair. Meanwhile, white friends — including Peppermint Patty, Charlie Brown, Sally and even Snoopy — were all seated across from him in real chairs as they feasted, Twitter users pointed out. The special, which debuted Nov. 20, 1973, aired again on Wednesday — prompting social media outrage over the gang’s highly unwoke picnic table arrangement. “Why is Franklin in Charlie Brown Thanksgiving sitting all by himself at the table. Man. Things that I did not notice as a child,” @Asharp52 blasted on Twitter. Others said good grief over a seating chart that would have thrilled George Wallace. “Not watching Charlie Brown Thanksgiving anymore, until they sit some people on the same side of the table as Franklin,” another critic tweeted, along with two black power-style fist emojis. The scene in question centers on an impromptu holiday feast — of toast, jelly beans and ice cream — in Charlie Brown’s backyard. At one point, poor lonesome Franklin topples over in his half-broken chair. “They give our friend the busted chair and won’t even sit on the same side of the table, more proof that Charlie Brown and his cohorts are RACIST,” slammed Twitter user @mwizzy128. But others defended the classic special, pointing out its creator Charles Schulz fought to add Franklin to the cast to stand up against racism in 1968. “Seriously please get some historical context. Charles M. Schultz was a trailblazer and bucked racism in those days by adding Franklin to reflect the issue… and challenging what was then going on in society,” tweeted California radio show host Mark Larson.

Exactly!!!  Well said Mark.  No, you’re not a racist, Charlie Brown.   🙂

Coulter: I Have a Dream … About Gay Wedding Cakes

The Supreme Court’s recent decision on whether a Christian baker can be forced to make a wedding cake for a gay marriage (no) arriving on the same day that Bill Clinton reared his syphilitic head on NBC’s “Today” reminded me how liberals always use black people as props. Midway through the last century, bedrock legal principles about property rights and freedom of association were abrogated to deal with a specific, intractable problem: We could not get Democrats to stop discriminating against blacks. So Republicans, with very little Democratic help, passed a slew of laws saying: No, even though you own that restaurant, you cannot discriminate against black customers. And no, even though we are a free people, you cannot refuse to associate with black people in your clubs, universities or sports teams. This should have been a one-time exception to the law for one specific group of people based on an emergency. But Democrats, never wild about freedom in the first place, saw “civil rights” as a great gig. Instead of civil rights being used to remedy historic injuries done to a specific group of people, they’d use “civil rights” as a false flag for all their pet projects. Just six years after passage of the historic 1964 Civil Rights Act, Democrats in New York had dropped black people from the equation and moved onto legalized abortion. State senator Manfred Ohrenstein of Manhattan explained why killing the unborn was a “right”: “It was the end of the civil rights era, and we viewed [abortion] as a civil right.” In the 1991 case Kreimer v. Morristown, a Carter-appointed federal district judge, H. Lee Sarokin, ruled that a public library’s discrimination against smelly, frightening homeless people violated the equal protection clause because it had a “disparate impact” on people who refuse to bathe compared to those who bathe regularly. Three years later, President Clinton promoted him to an appellate judgeship. (The judge, not the homeless person.) In 2007, then-governor Eliot Spitzer vowed that “New York state will continue to be a beacon of civil rights” — when proposing a state law that would guarantee access to late-term abortions. In June 2012, The New York Times chirpily reported “gay rights the fastest-moving civil rights movement in our nation’s history!” These days, you could be forgiven for not realizing that civil rights ever had anything to do with black people. According to Equal Opportunity Employment Commission statistics, for a least a decade, 65 percent of all “civil rights” claims have had absolutely nothing to do with race discrimination. The gay wedding cake caper is only the most recent example of our majestic “civil rights.” Instead of basing favored treatment under the law on a history of brutal and widespread injustice in America, liberals thought it should also be based on other forms of suffering, such as: being a woman, being a Muslim, wanting an abortion, having been born in Mexico, being a smelly homeless person stinking up the public library and — according to Ruth Bader Ginsburg this week — being a gay couple who wants to force a Christian to bake a cake for your wedding. It must make blacks feel great being compared to daft women, smelly homeless people and bossy gays harassing a Christian baker. And apes! Princeton ethics professor Peter Singer compares black people to apes, citing the black liberation movement as a model for the liberation of apes. We must “extend to other species,” Singer says, “the basic principle of equality” that we extend “to all members of our own species.” This wasn’t an Ambien-induced Twitter rant by a comedian. Singer wrote it, calmly and deliberately, in a book on “ethics.” Still, I believe the greatest insult black Americans have had to endure from liberals was when they called Bill Clinton the “first black president.” I notice that he was not the first black president when Democrats were singing Fleetwood Mac at his inauguration, nor when he was appointing the first woman attorney general or passing welfare reform. Only after Clinton was caught in the most humiliating sex scandal in U.S. history did he suddenly become “the first black president.” (Which is not true, according to Monica Lewinsky’s description of Clinton’s private parts.) During the House impeachment hearings, Rep. Maxine Waters ferociously defended Clinton, saying, “I am here in the name of my slave ancestors.” She said she had woken up in the middle of the night, “with flashes of the struggles of my African ancestors for justice.” What this had to do with Clinton perjuring himself about molesting a chubby Jewish White House intern was anyone’s guess. Always the master of subtlety, as soon as the Lewinsky scandal broke, Clinton promptly invited the Rev. Jesse Jackson to the White House to “pray” with him. Two months later, he took off on an 11-day, six-nation $43 million trip to — guess where? Africa! Haven’t black people suffered enough without this horny hick piggybacking on their oppression?

No kidding!  And well said, Ann..  Conservative firebrand Ann Coulter is responsible for that funny rant.  Her point is well taken, though.  Democrats use blacks as props to further their agenda, which oftentimes is NOT in the best interests.  And yet, blacks still vote for Dems overwhelmingly for some odd reason.  If only they studied a little history….they might rethink that in the next election..

Chuck Schumer votes against Trump judicial nominee…because he’s white

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer faced a stern rebuke from congressional colleagues for citing skin color in voting against a white federal judge nominee earlier this week. Schumer, D-N.Y., said on the Senate floor Wednesday that the nomination of Marvin Quattlebaum, a white lawyer who is a partner at Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough in Greenville, S.C., “speaks to the overall lack of diversity in President Trump’s selections for the federal judiciary.” He complained that many of Trump’s nominees have been white males. He also complained that Republicans previously held up two black judges nominated under the Obama administration for the position— which The Post and Courier notes has long been vacant. “It is long past time that the judiciary starts looking a lot more like the America it represents,” Schumer said. “Having a diversity of views and experience on the federal bench is necessary for the equal administration of justice.” The senator said that with Quattlebaum’s nomination, the Trump administration was “taking a giant step backwards” in terms of diversity. Quattlebaum was ultimately confirmed to the district judgeship on Thursday, 69-29. Republican lawmakers, meanwhile, slammed Schumer for his statements. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said Thursday it was actually Schumer’s vote against Quattlebaum that was “a massive step backward.” While Schumer “is not a racist,” Graham tweeted, “this was an absolutely shameful reason to vote against a very qualified nominee like Marvin Quattlebaum.” He added, “Voting against a highly qualified nominee because of the color of his skin does nothing to bring our country and nation together.” Sen. Tim Scott, also a Republican serving South Carolina and the GOP’s sole black senator, tweeted, “Perhaps Senate Democrats should be more worried about the lack of diversity on their own staffs than attacking an extremely well-qualified judicial nominee from the great state of South Carolina.” Schumer asserted that the only reason Quattlebaum was nominated for the unoccupied position was because the state’s Republican senators didn’t return their “blue slips” — a blue form used by senators to voice approval or disapproval for a home state nominee — for Obama nominees Alison Lee and Don Beatty in 2013. Democrats have said that Republicans used blue slips to block about 18 of Obama’s nominations, arguing the denial of a hearing for a nominee without two blue slips was fine with Republicans then. Democrats said the policy shouldn’t change just because the person who sits in the White House is different. Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., countered on Twitter that Lee’s nomination “was withdrawn because of a significant bond issue” and Beatty eventually was appointed as the Chief Justice of the state’s Supreme Court.

And who, exactly is the real racist here?  Exactly…  Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) is notorious for shamelessly playing the race card.  Looks like it may have backfired just a little this time..  Regardless, another very qualified Trump nominee has been confirmed, despite the outrageous, hypocritical, and offensive political posturing by Chuck Schumer.  Congrats to this new judge!

Journo: Anti-Looting Laws ‘Inseparable from White Supremacy’

A Twitter-certified journalist has attributed laws protecting private property to “white supremacy,” drawing a flood of criticisms and mockery. Sarah L. Jaffe, Nation Institute fellow and journalist whose work has appeared in Salon, the Week, the Washington Post, and the Atlantic, slammed the Miami Police Department for a Twitter ad warning against looting, since the looters featured in the accompanying photo happened to be predominantly black. In her Tweet, Jaffe stated that “the carceral state exists to protect private property,” which seemed to imply that the defense of private property is a bad thing and a tool of “white supremacy.” She failed to give her opinion concerning whether the state should defend the property of people of color. Jaffe’s Tweet received 4,300 “likes” but also unleashed a hurricane of scorn, which took a wide variety of forms. Many of the replies focused on the right to private property as a fundamental human right irrespective of race. Others noted that laws against theft exist in every nation in the world, including nations whose populations are composed of people of color. Some took issue with the progressive degrading of the term “racism,” which now can be thrown around to mean virtually anything. While some commentators mocked the absurdity of Jaffe’s remark, others answered her in a more serious vein, taking the time to explain the actual purpose of criminal law and its enforcement. And others wondered aloud whether Jaffe’s dislike of the enforcement of anti-looting laws would extend to the looting of her own property. Sarah Jaffe is, of course, white herself.

..of course.  Sarah, of course, is a moron to even make such a ridiculous comment on Twitter.  And, kudos to the Miami PD for calling it as it is!  Missouri’s Gov. Eric Greitens (R-MO), who is a former Navy SEAL, echoed a similar sentiment recently during the riots in St. Louis.  Anyway, to see some of the responses that she received, click on the text above.

Susan Rice suggests race, gender bias linked to ‘unmasking’ backlash

Susan Rice, the Obama national security adviser under fire over her alleged involvement in the “unmasking” of Trump associates during the 2016 presidential election, suggested in a fresh interview that race and gender might be playing a role in the scrutiny she’s faced. In an interview with journalist Michael Tomasky for New York Magazine, Rice reportedly questioned the criticism she’s faced dating back to the Benghazi controversy. “Why me? Why not Jay Carney, for example, who was then our press secretary, who stood up more?” she asked. Tomasky noted in the piece that Carney “isn’t an African-American woman, of course” and apparently asked Rice whether that is the key factor. Rice, in response, left the door open: “I don’t know… I do not leap to the simple explanation that it’s only about race and gender. I’m trying to keep my theories to myself until I’m ready to come out with them. It’s not because I don’t have any.” But Rice mentioned other prominent female figures – like Hillary Clinton and Condoleezza Rice – who faced “ad hominem” attacks, suggesting a correlation. Asked about the comments, a Republican Capitol Hill source pushed back. “This is screaming out for attention… She’s saying I don’t know why they all started picking on me to begin with.” As to the suggestion of race and gender being a factor, the source countered, then “why would there be a subpoena for a white male?”

Exactly!!

Fmr OH Black Dem State Rep Nina Turner: USA ‘Founded on Racism and on Sexism’

Former Ohio State Sen. Nina Turner (D) and now Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) endorser Nina Turner gave her reaction to GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump’s campaign rallies Saturday on MSNBC. According to Turner, Trump “continues to amp up folks in a way that is unbecoming of this country.” She then added this is not all on Trump because racism is in the DNA of this country, and that the country was founded on racism and sexism. “[Bernie Sanders] has spoken out against the environment that Mr. Trump has been creating for quite some time,” Turner stated. “And as we see, Mr. Trump continues to amp up folks in a way that is unbecoming of this country. And I know that we’re quick to point the finger at him, but let us not forget that in the DNA of this country, Chris, is racism.” She continued, “This country was founded on racism and sexism, point blank. And we need to admit that. It would be one thing if Mr. Trump was standing alone, but he is not standing alone. So we need a leader that is going to speak to our higher selves, and that leader is Senator Bernie Sanders.”

I really have NO clue what this race-card playing, entitlement-minded, black racist Democrat piece of garbage from Ohio is saying.  But, her assertion that our great “country was founded on racism and sexism” is the kind of stuff Americans are sick of hearing from self-righteous tools like her.  No, Ms. Turner.  America was founded on freedom.  And, one of the reasons Donald Trump is popular is because he isn’t saying how awful America is like you are.  People don’t like hearing folks like you whining about how mean, unfair, racist and sexist our country is.  If it’s so awful, move to Cuba.  Unreal..

MSNBC’s Harris-Perry: Democratic Field ‘Anemic,’ ‘Whiter Than the Oscars’

Melissa Harris-Perry commented on the 2016 primary race Saturday on her MSNBC show, saying the fact that there are only two Democratic candidates remaining at this point shows how “anemic” the party is. “I would argue that for me, Thursday night, watching Hillary Clinton and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), already this early, we are in New Hampshire. and our party is so anemic, that we are down to two candidates, right? Say what you want to say about the mad house going on on the Republican side. They’ve got all kinds of folks that still want the Republican nomination. We have two folks who are advanced in age, who have been in government for a long time.” Harris-Perry later added that it is “whiter than the Oscars” in the Democratic race.

And who, exactly, are the true racists?  Exactly..