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: