Southwest Detroit
Abandoned home in Southwest Detroit

By John Ruberry

Yesterday Donald Trump continued his outreach to black and inner city voters by speaking at Great Faith Ministries in Detroit’s Barton-McFarland neighborhood. Even on the Motor City’s low standards this is an especially depressed part of the city, three years ago the area just east of Barton-McFarland was named the most dangerous neighborhood in the United States.

Rather than focusing on over fifty years of Democratic failure in the Motor City–Detroit has not had a Republican mayor since 1963, Trump uncharacteristically took a modest tone at Great Faith.

“But today I just want to let you know that I am here to listen to you, and I’ve been doing that and we had a fantastic interview with Bishop [Wayne T.] Jackson.” Trump said from the pulpit. “It was really an amazing interview. He’s better than the people who do that professionally. It’s true, it’s true. He’s better.”

“Our nation is divided. We talk past each other and not to each other.” Trump continued. “And those who seek office do not do enough to step into the community and learn what is going on. They don’t know — they have no clue. I’m here today to learn, so that we can together remedy injustice in any form, and so that we can also remedy economics so that the African-American community can benefit economically through jobs and income and so many other different ways.”

When is the last time Hillary Clinton, in one of her increasingly infrequently public campaign appearances, said she was there to learn?

Trump decried the sidelining so many African America youths with “unfulfilled potential…tremendous potential,” adding, “Our whole country loses out when we’re unable to harness the brilliance and the energy of these folks.”

When Trump was finished speaking he received a standing ovation.Trump Pence

Donald Trump will not win a majority of the black vote in 2016. He won’t even come close. But unlike recent Republican nominees, the political newcomer is campaigning outside of his party’s comfort zone. As a political newcomer, Trump doesn’t reflexively subdivide Americans into different voting blocs. There is too much this-is-a-black-problem-in-the-ghetto type of thinking in this country. What’s wrong in the inner city is an American problem.

Trump gets it.

Related post:

I walked its streets–the tragedy of Detroit

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

The_Peacemakers_1868
(L,R) Generals Sherman and Grant, President Lincoln, and Admiral Porter. Linked attribution.

by baldilocks

Originally posted on December 10, 2009.

While hanging out yesterday at Ace’s yesterday [sic; December 9, 2009] as he was flogging racists, I happened to mention that many if not most black Americans view the federal government as beneficial and friendly.  Some other commenters were surprised and I was surprised at their surprise, because it isn’t difficult to figure out why this is.  Whether it’s the Emancipation or the desegregation of the Armed Forces or Brown v. Board or the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts, the federal government for the most part had seemed to be on the side of the black American as his constitutional rights were being oppressed by state or local governments.

What needs to be spelled, however is what the federal government did in the above-mentioned areas: it legally removed obstacles to the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of Americans who are black.  And that is what it was supposed to do.

The present problem in my unlearned opinion is this: the federal government began overstepping its bounds during the Great Depression and did so most infamously in the late sixties via the Great Society programs.  Doing more that getting local racists out of the way, the federal government sought to and succeeded in making itself the suppliers of life, liberty and, putatively, the happiness of many black Americans.  (Try telling a senior of any race that Social Security is sending the country to financial ruin. You’ll get an earful about her “rights”.)

And even many black Americans who do not rely on the federal government still view the fed as our friend because of that history.

What’s needed in order to change this perception is obvious: education–not a new education but the old one, one which contains an objective explanation of the role of government.

Simply put, the role of the American government is to remove obstacles to liberty of the People–even when that obstacle is American government itself.  Supplying all of one’s needs is not government’s role.  That’s God’s purview.

We all remember President Obama’s statement containing the assertion that one of the flaws of the US Constitution was that is only contained a  list of “negative rights,” meaning negative government “rights.”  The idea that a Harvard-trained lawyer thinks that the government has rights or that there was no list of positive responsibilities assigned to government was mockable.  (Hey, you voted for him.)

But what the statement betrayed was a widespread misconception present in those of us who aren’t lawyers of any variety of a friendly fed whose role is to insert itself between God and man’s liberty and to redistribute wealth (aka stealing).  The notion that the founders “forgot” to address this is hilarious.

So when the Democrats came to full power [in 2009], they began to build on the foundation that Democrat Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt and Lyndon B. Johnson laid.  The good news?  Between Socialized Medicine, Cap and Trade, TARP, etc., the federal government’s active role in overstepping its bounds–in crippling America–is opening the eyes of Americans of all races.  The bad news: there may not be an America left when the federal locusts finish.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2012. Her second novel will be done in 2016. Follow her on Twitter.

Please contribute to Juliette’s JOB:  Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or hit Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism—->>>>baldilocks

by baldilocksBaldilocks mini

In panning Ta-Nehisi Coates’ open letter to his 15-year-old son, Between the World and Me, Randall Kennedy expresses something which every thinking black American has considered, even those who call themselves liberals.

[Coates] insists that behind apparent black racial pathology is the omnipresent reality of white domination—in this instance an act of white supremacy carried out by a black marionette. “To yell ‘black on black crime,’” he contends, “is to shoot a man and then shame him for bleeding.”

A difficulty with attributing this much influence to white folks is that doing so negates the will of black folks. This brings to mind Ralph Ellison’s critique of Gunnar Myrdal’s An American Dilemma. Myrdal averred that “the Negro’s entire life and, consequently, also his opinions … are, in the main, to be considered as secondary reactions to more primary pressures from the side of the dominant white majority.” Objecting to this formulation, Ellison asked:

Can a people … live and develop for over three hundred years simply by reacting? Are American Negroes simply the creation of white men, or have they at least helped to create themselves out of what they found around them? Men have made a way of life in caves and upon cliffs; why cannot Negroes have made a life upon the horns of the white men’s dilemma?

(All emphasis mine.)

In 1970s, when Affirmative Action became all the rage, one of the few overtly political statements issuing forth from my parents that I can recall is their fervent opposition to it. Simply put, they viewed the policy as an official assertion of the innate inferiority of blacks. They still do.

Professional Black Leftists (PBLs) like Coates, et al. sometimes claim that we black conservatives are “showing off for the white man’s approval” when we put forth conservative opinions in public. It’s a bemusing accusation, since it seems to me that professional black Leftists are inordinately concerned with what white people as a group think of blacks, as if white America were an audience, black liberals were putting on some kind of Broadway show, and black conservatives were the competing show across the street.

Mr.Kennedy’s review calls forth a realization that has brewed in the back of my mind for quite some time: PBLs actually believe that the majority of black people are inferior to other races.

Oh, not themselves, of course. But, all of their bluster toward conservatives of all hues, and even their attempts to turn their mommy/daddy issues into a field of scholarship are defense mechanisms against saying this outright or even admitting it to themselves. And they get angry when you, white person, refuse to see “our inferiority” and to give us our collective wheelchairs. (I have another theory about black failure. It does not involve eugenics or IQ comparisons.)

Of course it would take a great deal of effort to undo the real problem; not inferiority, but the tree which LBJ planted all those years ago, the fruit of which is this. And thisAnd this. Rotten fruit.

LBJ demonstrated that a culture can be changed on purpose for the worse. (That’s what European leaders are trying to do now, by the way.) PBLs cannot grasp this particular pattern. Believing in the inferiority of other blacks is easier.

And for those of us who are at a loss as to how to make things better, repentance–making an 180-degree turn–begins in the house of the Lord. Action follows therefrom.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2012. Her second novel, tentatively titled, Arlen’s Harem, will be done in 2016. Follow her on Twitter.

Please contribute to Juliette’s Projects JOB: HER TRIP TO KENYA! Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or hit Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism—->>>>

By John Ruberry

One of the slogans of the anti-police protesters is “Black lives matter.” By the way, I don’t know anyone who thinks otherwise. As I wrote in this space last week, I have doubts about the real motivation of the anti-cop movement, which I view as a proxy for the real fight of leftists–socialist revolution.

Out of the mainstream media eye is sad Buffalo, New York. As with Detroit, the one-time 15th largest city in the United States has been plagued by deindustrialization and depopulation–Buffalo, which has 260,000 residents, is now America’s 45th largest city.

Last year was another rough one for the Queen City. Murders soared in 2014–there were 62–whereas there were only 47 the year prior.

Of last year’s killings in Buffalo–a minuscule 14 of them were solved–that’s fewer than one-quarter. As for black lives–over eighty percent of those murder victims were African-American.

Early last month there was a large protest in Buffalo decrying the deaths of Michael Brown and Eric Garner. That’s quite ironic, because there were 12 murders there in December, the most of 2014. There were about a dozen shootings in Buffalo in the last two weeks of the year. Sure there are anti-crime groups in New York’s state’s second largest city, but they lack, which is a good thing, the stridency of the anti-police movement. But I have to wonder, where are the anti-crime protests in Buffalo?

You’ve heard of Brown and Garner. But the name Denell A. Baker is probably one you don’t know. On December 28, he became the 62nd homicide victim in Buffalo–shot to death in the Fruit Belt neighborhood. I don’t know Baker’s race. But let me end this post in this manner: Black lives matter. All lives matter.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

by baldilocksbaldilocks

I’m guilty of many things, but one is talking about race and Things Black too much.

The reputational demise of public astrophysicist Neil Degrasse Tyson elicited a great deal of Schadenfreude, but it depressed me for one reason: I liked seeing a black person talk about something other than race, being black, or crime–the last of which is all too often a byproduct of race. Finding out that Mr. Tyson is a bit of a charlatan made me sad.

That said, in this post, I will be again guilty of discussing race, but only to point to three pockets of hope on the subject.

The mindterm election this past week saw the turning of the U.S. Senate to the GOP and GOP gains for the House. Among these are Senator Tim Scott (SC), Representative-Elects Mia Love (UT-4), and the much-less heralded, but no less significant Will Hurd (TX-23). That these three people are black and Republican is remarkable in itself, but some might also find it equally remarkable that the majority of each constituency is non-black. (Mr. Hurd’s district consists of mostly of Americans of Mexican ancestry.) However, this shouldn’t be surprising at all.

Most (all?) U.S. congressional districts represented by black Democrats–Congressional Black Caucus members–have long been carved out for them. I contend that each one of them has been planted by the Democrat Party and the party heavily funds all of their campaigns.

It is a method of keeping each of these districts voting Democratic, keeping the voters quiet about economic progress, and it feeds on the indoctrinated notion that having a representative who looks like you somehow elevates you. That same notion explains why virtually all black American voters voted for Barack Obama, especially in 2012. And I need to repeat: it keeps each of these districts voting Democratic. This is how the fallacy of black=Democrat was born.

An inverse anecdotal example: I live in a district with a majority-black voting base–formerly represented by Maxine Waters and recently re-carved in order for Karen Bass to retain her place at the table–and have watched, cycle after cycle, as Republicans–usually black, but not always–have haplessly run, including the locally famous homeless activist Ted Hayes in 2008. These brave people get no publicity and, usually, little funding, though Mr. Hayes got a great deal of the latter.

Also related: the National Association for the Advancement of Communist Principles (NAACP) ignored the elections of Scott, Love and Hurd while nattering on about voting rights in its November 4 election statement. This omission is the very embodiment of the aforementioned indoctrination. Take a bow, LBJ!

Back to the newly elected black Republicans, the demographics of these pockets of post-racialism is the real progress: that three people who do not look like the majority of their constituents can be elected by them and that three black politicians can base their campaigns on issues other than race.

And, please, save it about the election of Barack Obama. We all know that his election and his subsequent two terms have not represented the onset of post-racialism. Remember, being black equals being a Democrat, according to the brainwashing.

However, I think that the ascent of these three legislators will make a difference. Maybe.

After all, wasn’t that what the Civil Rights Movement was really about, conflating public and private property notwithstanding?

(Thanks to Instapundit and to Twitchy)

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2009; the second edition in 2012. Her second novel, Arlen’s Harem, will be done in 2015.

Please contribute to Juliette’s Projects: Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or contribute to Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism—->>>>

 

Tomorrow on DaTechGuy on DaRadio it’s a double dose of Authors!

In the first hour I talk to Dr. Eugene Walton about his new book: African Immigrants & African Americans community or conflict

It talks about the interesting relationship between Black Americans who descended from slaves and Blacks who have come to America from Africa. Some of the attitudes that Dr. Walton speaks about are rather astounding…(all emphasis in original):

African immigrants want no “community” with African Americans because their attitudes toward the Descendants are so negative as to make such a relationship incompatible and highly unlikely. After all, who wants “community” with “lazy losers who didn‘t take advantage of opportunities,” who are unpredictable and violent– whose association represents only downward assimilation?

Compare that to this quote from Today’s Buzzfeed story about the president skipping the NAACP
convention:

Alvin Chambliss, a retired law professor at Texas Southern University and lifelong members of the NAACP, blamed Obama’s advisers — particularly Valerie Jarrett — for his decision not to show up, echoing a common complaint here about the people in the president’s inner circle. Chambliss, who called the president’s absence “a downer,” said Jarrett is too afraid of Obama becoming defined by his race, and has led him to take his African-American supporters for granted.

“I don’t think there’s anyone around the president who’s really, truly from the black community,”

And then remember that President Obama’s father was Kenya.

In the Second Hour we welcome back Pam Geller author of Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance & The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America

We will talk about her speech that was banned at the LA Jewish Federation and the latest Obama developments.

Join us tomorrow at 10 AM EST You can listen live at wcrnradio.com or via Tune-In and you can join the discussion at 508-438-0965 or 888-9-fedora

Update: There are three different links for the WCRN live stream
If you are using Windows media player click here
If you are using Winamp clip here
If you are using real player click here

If you are using something else, then go to Tune-in.

Saw this at Instapundit yesterday from Michael Barone:

In a 2008 referendum in California, 70 percent of blacks voted against same-sex marriage. A same-sex marriage bill was defeated this year in Maryland after black Democratic legislators opposed it. Same-sex marriage would be legal in California and Maryland were it not for opposition by black voters.

Mainstream media reporters pepper Republican presidential candidates with questions about the issue but seldom ask Obama about it. But if it’s a fair question for Republicans, it’s a fair question for Democrats as well.

I’ve touched on this subject myself but there is one overriding factor that is ignored and is a paradox.

His “opposition” to gay Marriage only helps him among blacks because they think he is telling the truth.

His “opposition” to gay marriage doesn’t hurt him among liberals because they don’t believe he is telling the truth.

These are two mutually exclusive statements, As long as liberals are convinced he is selling a bill of good to the black community (as I do) and the black community continues to buy this bill of goods he is fine.

The moment the Black Community no longer buys it, or the moment he takes decisive actions (Bawhahahahah it’s funny just typing it) to convince the Black community he means it then you will see a backlash from one side or the other.

But democrats are betting that no matter what they believe the Black community will not abandon the 1st black president Maxine Waters and the BarberShop elections not withstanding.

“I think President Obama will do just fine.” Mika Brzezinski Morning Joe 8/11/11 on his re-election prospects.

“Now I probably wouldn’t say this in front of white folks but in front of y’all I’ll speak my mind” Cedric the Entertainer as Eddie in Barbershop 2002

In the electoral math for 2012 one factor in every calculation is Barack Obama will generate a large black turnout and win between 90-95% of their vote. It is the security blanket that Democrats cling to, the cornerstone of the house of cards the liberals are building.

However that cornerstone, although looking strong from the outside may not be as solid inside.

On Morning Joe today we saw Tavis Smiley and Cornel West hinting at the weakness of this president while doing their best to avoid saying it aloud or hitting him directly. I found the appearance extraordinary. Yes they are pushing their radio show and tour, but the willingness to tweak ever, so slightly the president outside of their community spoke volumes.

I don’t know the demographics of Morning Joe but I have the feeling they do not serve an overwhelmingly black audience.

I’ve already commented on how the black community is the cornerstone of the president’s polling:

The black community runs 90-95% Democratic and voted that way last election. If you think that more than one in 20 black Americans are going to tell a national pollster that they disapprove of the first Black President you are absolutely out of your minds.

At the same time Stacy McCain has the numbers:

The most recent figures show African American joblessness at 16.2 percent. For black males, it’s at 17.5 percent; And for black teens, it’s nearly 41 percent.

(those are June figures btw)

Roxeanne’s correct explanation for the gap not withstanding, the Peggy Josephs and the “Obama Money” crowd in Detroit expected great things for themselves; instead got a president who has kept his distance from the community that provided his most loyal support.

The result? That’s the question. We are seeing only slight glimpses of discontent, but what is it that we aren’t seeing?

Let’s say it aloud: If Barack Obama had Jimmy Carter’s pigmentation there would be democrats lining up to primary him with slogans like: “We can do better” and “Let’s nominate a fighter for the working man“. Those potential candidates are discouraged by the party because if even 10% of the black community abandons them, democrats become unelectable.

I’m sure that if I went back to Ga-4 and asked the overwhelmingly black community there: “Do you support the president?” I’d be told YES overwhelmingly. If my friend George, a black minister in that same community asked that question I suspect he would get a more nuanced response.

This is the wild card in election 2012. Behind closed doors is the black community having conversations like this about the president?

I suspect they are and have been for several months. If I’m right then this election is going to be a bigger disaster for democrats than 2010 was.

Anyone who maintains that abortion is a service to the poor needs to read this story out of NY:

Pro-aborts from NARAL, Planned Parenthood, and the rest of the abortion industry accused us of “targeting minorities,” “preying upon women,” and “endangering women’s right to choose.” They expressed outrage that we open our clinics in the same buildings as they operate in.

So with that in mind, I asked the Council who was targeting whom, who was preying upon whom, as I shared the following numbers from the Summary of Vital Statistics, The City of New York, Table 29a:

Between 1999-2008 there were 922,272 abortions in New York City. Of these:

50,382 (5.5%) were Asian

101, 856 (11%) were White

296,330 (32.1%) were Hispanic

430,515 (46.7%) were Black

79% of all abortions in New York City in that 10-yr period – 726,845 babies – were Black and Hispanic.

Again, I asked, who is targeting whom?

The rest of the statistics at the site are astounding, and some are even more horrifying.

How is it that people who are convinced that the tea party is the reincarnation of the KKK support democrats who finance the slaughter of their race?

…and finds the neighborhood wanting:

Here is the part to me that says something about us societally. Obviously multiple gun shots. Just look at the number of dead people. NO ONE CALLED THE COPS.

The police were alerted by a device called Shot Spotter. If it weren’t for the technology how long might it have been before the police knew something happened? Dawn?

This to me says more about the neighborhood and what some areas think about society; law and order than others do.

The truth is a lot of race hucksters have made a comfortable living pitting Black Americans against the police and their communities have paid the price for it in blood.