by baldilocks

Back in 2003, when I started blogging, conservatives who are black were very popular. They (we) are now also, because we still are so few in relative numbers.

And, for the most part, we were and are regular citizens. Even the very popular Candace Owens, Diamond and Silk, and Terrance Williams – persons with eloquence and/or humor – began as everyday persons who used technology and their gifts to make their points and express their support for Donald Trump and for conservative ideas.

And this is what makes long-time Trump supporter Kanye West different from the rest of us who refuse to toe the Democrat line. His hip-hop composed platform was already built. All he had to do is climb up and begin to speak. In his case, mere agreement with Owens began an avalanche.

West is no conservative but doesn’t refute the ideology. Refreshingly, he says that he doesn’t know enough about being a conservative to call himself one. I’ve seen that he is getting an introduction to the mighty works of one Thomas F. Sowell. I’m going to suggest this as his starting point.

Many conservative observers have predicted that West will be pushed back into line, and, indeed, the attempts have already been made. A member of the Crips – that long-time terrorizer of law-abiding black and other Southern Californians — has warned West to stay out of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Or else. (West and his wife, Kim Kardashian West, live in Calabasas, CA.)

And, Maxine Waters … well, read this:

Maxine Waters: “This one. Get him!”

Politico asked Waters, an outspoken critic of President Trump who advocates for his impeachment, to comment on the president’s recent “bromance with Kanye West.”:

“Kanye West is a very creative young man who has presented some of the most revolutionary material in the African-American community,” she replied. “But we also think that sometimes Kanye West talks out of turn and perhaps sometimes he needs some assistance in helping him to formulate some of his thoughts.”

She said West should think about the impact of his words and “maybe not have so much to say.”

“We don’t think that he actually means to do harm,” she added, “but we’re not sure he really understands the impact of what he’s saying, at the time that he’s saying it and how that weighs on, particularly the African American community — and for young people in general. … And I think maybe he should think twice about politics, and maybe not have so much to say.”

Waters represents the Organized Left; the Crips street and prison gang is one of its organic enforcement arms. And both are indicating something very important: Kanye West is dangerous to the Left. And, it seems that he’s just getting started.

I have been critical of – and cutting about — West and Kardashian West before and I probably will be again, but I have to thank him for having a brain in his head, for learning to use his platform wisely, and for his fearlessness. And whatever one thinks of Kardashian West, she has been doing what any good wife does: ferociously standing by her man.

Someone – Andrew Klavan, I think — once said that culture was a very important aspect of societal change. Well, the West family has certainly been a significant portion of popular culture; yes, most of it bad.

Funny thing about change, though. Sometimes it will happen in the least expected place, to the least expected person.

And, sometimes, it will make things better.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here.  She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.

Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar for his new not-GoDaddy host!

Or hit Juliette’s!

Update (DTG) A very welcome Instalanche as 2018 has not been kind to our numbers on the traffic, tip jar and particularly subscription side.

If you think the cost of first rate writers like Juliette not to mention first hand reporting and interviews we do are worth it to counter balance the MSM and the various online censors I would ask you to hit DaTipJar below



Consider subscribing. We need another $200 in monthly subscribers to make up for attrition in 2018 thus far and we are still hoping to get a redesign along with our move for our 10th anniversary this November.


Choose a Subscription level


Finally might I suggest my book Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer makes an excellent Gift.

by baldilocks

From the party of separate and sure-it’s-equal.

Buzzfeed:

Rep. Maxine Waters, a California Democrat, will speak at the top of a [Black Entertainment Television] News special after Trump delivers the State of the Union, a BET spokesperson told BuzzFeed News. The program, “Angela Rye’s State of the Union,” is part of a broader partnership announced just days ago between the network and the Democratic strategist and political commentator [Rye]. (…)

The spokesperson said activists and some elected officials will analyze Trump’s first year in office on the program, and will talk about “building black politics and the value of engagement across today’s socio-political landscape.” A Democratic source familiar with the production on Friday night told BuzzFeed News that it wasn’t immediately clear if the program would air on Tuesday or Wednesday night.

IJR:

Although it may not be her intent, Waters runs the risk of stepping on her own party’s response to the president’s speech — Rep. Joe Kennedy III (D-Mass.) will be delivering the Democratic Party’s official response Tuesday night, immediately following the president’s address.

Monica Showalter thinks that the Democrat Party didn’t pick the more well-known Waters for the mainstream rebuttal because the party suspects that Ms. Waters might embarrass them  — something that is far from unprecedented. But it’s important to remember that the congresswoman — along with several other members of congress — is boycotting the State of the Union address, so it would be a bit silly to have her give that speech.

In fact, I don’t think that the leadership of the Party itself has anything to do with the Waters decision. And since Waters said this, “I don’t trust him, I don’t appreciate him, and I wouldn’t waste my time listening to what he has to say. He does not deserve my attention,” to call Waters’ upcoming speech a ‘rebuttal’ is probably a mislabeling.

I’m betting it will be a tantrum and a call to tribalism.

Will I listen to Waters’ speech? Probably. Unlike the congresswoman and company, I think that there is great value in listening to one’s ideological opponent.

Related:

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 one day soon! Follow her on Twitter and on Gab.ai.

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!

As you might have heard Democrat Rep Maxine Waters had a town hall in her district that surprise, surprise included a chant calling for Donald Trump’s impeachment

She led her supporters in a chant to “Impeach 45,” repeating it over and over

Now there was a lot of pushback to Congresswoman Waters at that event that you can read about here here and here but while the counter protestors are fun I have a more basic question for the California rep who is anxious to see President Donald Trump impeached.

Where is YOUR impeachment resolution?

You have been calling for Donald Trump impeachment since practically the day he was sworn in, you have also been a member of congress since 1991. Surely a woman with 27 years of experience in the house is capable of writing and presenting a resolution of impeachment without waiting on anyone else.

Furthermore if the American People are dislike President Trump as much as you and the media insist (Chuck Todd kept bandying around a 38% support figure) such a resolution should not only be greeted with joy by Democrats, but with 2018 coming up and Democrats and the media allies insisting that the midterms are a disaster waiting to happen for the GOP thanks to Trump surely a person as eloquent and experienced as you can bring them around if not by the merits but by the potential political consequences?

And just think if you can get the votes, the trail in the Senate would not only help the Democrat Senate efforts in 2018 but then you can make the case that is so clear to you and your supporters to the entire world, namely that Donald Trump is unfit to be President of the United States of America.

Now I know some people like myself have suggested that such a move would end in disaster to the left, that the lack of actual evidence of impeachable offenses would rapidly become apparent and that rather than a chance to demonstrate Democrat power, it would be a trap of your making that would shatter your party even further.

But what do I know? I’m just a conservative writer and blogger and you’ve been in congress longer than my children have been alive.

Show the world how much better you know than me, introduce a resolution of Impeachment into the congress and reap the praise of progressives everywhere.

I dare you.

by baldilocks

An old, clueless congresswoman speaks for the millennials now? Very appropriate.

Various publications have been revving up coverage of Waters as a millennial icon after the congresswoman abruptly left a confidential meeting with FBI Director James Comey, claiming he did not have any credibility.

In late January, Elle magazine published an article titled, “Congresswoman Maxine Waters Will Read You Now.” The article talks about Waters’ impressive “shade”–meaning the ability to underhandedly insult people–calling her “this week’s Shade Bae.”

“I’m tempted to elect Congresswoman Waters as this week’s Shade Bae, but shade is subtle. Waters doesn’t have time for subtlety. Waters knows that desperate times call for shadier measures. She is reading this town for filth,” Elle says.

Waters has said she identifies with millennials, even saying that she was once a millennial, the Washington Free Beacon reported.

“I was a millennial once. No longer of course, but I love what you’re doing,” she said, before telling millennials to “stay woke.”

“I was a millennial once.”  How many non sequiturs can one person fit into such a short sentence? And no one over 18 should use the term “woke” unless ridicule is involved.

Every time I’ve read a comment section after a conservative site features Waters’ words, a singular question recurs:

“How does she keep getting elected?”

To be blunt, that question is almost as stupid as Waters’ assertion. Anyone who asks it presumes that Waters’ constituents want the same things from her that other constituents want from their congresscritters. False.

Representing means something different to Ms. Waters’ constituents than it does to you.

For many years, I lived in Ms. Waters’ district. The 2014 Election was the last one that occurred during the time when I lived there and there was no Republican on the ballot. Additionally, Ms. Waters’ husband walks the neighborhoods and makes sure that Democrats Get Out The Vote.

So, even though she blabs the Democrats secrets and secret wishes, like “socializing” the oil companies, Obama’s “powerful” database on everyone, and the weeks-ago outing of the Obama Administration’s surveillance on the pre-inauguration Trump team, and even though she, apparently, has no concept of generational labelling, she’ll keep getting elected. But, guess what! This is a good thing for conservatives.

Since she seems incapable of discretion, I think we should pay a great deal of attention to everything she says. It’s a good way of finding out what her party is planning.

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 on April 2017! Follow her on Twitter and on Gab.ai.

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!

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—->>>>

 

I’ve always remembered a particular episode of Gilligan’s Island (Gilligan vs. Gilligan available online here) that had a particular exchange between Mr. Howell and the Russian spy posing as Gilligan. Mr. Howell puts his chess piece on an illegal square. Mr. Howell reacts indignantly:

Mr. Howell: Young man are you accusing a Howell of cheating? I’ll have you know I’m far too wealthy.

Spy Gilligan: To cheat?

Mr. Howell: No, to be accused!

It reminds me that there once was a time when our icons such as JFK were far too important to have their dirty laundry aired in public.

How does that relate to The Rangel/Waters issues? Consider this; as Black America gradually progressed in rights and influence, they also gradually took the places at the seats of power that their growing influence and the slow progress toward legal equality demanded.

Like all men and woman those people who attained power and office were individuals with their own strengths, weaknesses and foibles. However those foibles while they might be known in their own communities were not aired to the general pubic. Not because the community approved but because you didn’t tear down your own when it took so long to get to the mountaintop (this is of course not unique to the Black community). As blacks migrated to the democratic party and as the party became more dependent on their vote, it became a priority for the party as well to keep any problems in house with a tact cloak of silence. Thus any such suggestion became a racial issue and the proponent of such questions a racist.

Now however things are different, the digital age forces light on things that were once hidden (read Rev Wright) and with our first black president (sorry Bill Clinton) it is impossible to pretend that African American’s place in American society is defined primarily by the sins of the past.

James Clyburn not withstanding, Charlie Rangel and Maxine Waters ethics issues have nothing to do with race and everything to do with actions. The actions against them are not signs of the return of the Jim Crow past meant to keep Black America underfoot. It also shows we have progressed beyond the equally offensive but less violent era of tokenism.

This is the sign of a new era where we can look at a member of congress of any race and see…a member of congress. This means we can judge said member not on the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I think that’s progress and America in general and the Black community in particular are better off for it.

Update: Morgan Freeman knew what he was talking about.

As does Col Allen West: