Officer’s Tragic Death Leads To More Race Baiting
Jun 1, 2009 Political
An off duty police officer was tragically killed in Harlem by another officer while chasing a would be criminal who the officer caught trying to break into his car. The off duty officer (a black man) was not in uniform and was displaying his weapon while chasing the suspect. He was ordered by a uniformed officer (who did not know he was a cop) to drop the weapon. He failed to do that and he did not identify himself as a police officer. He was shot and killed by the uniformed officer who is white.
This is a tragedy and the family of the dead officer as well as the officer who shot him will be traumatized by it for a very long time. What they do not need is a bunch of claims about racist cops and how it is dangerous to be black in America.
The officer was not in uniform and was running while brandishing a weapon. To anyone observing he would look like a criminal regardless of his color. Failure to obey the orders of a uniformed officer only made him look more like a criminal. He should have known to stop and identify himself and I am certain he would have expected the same thing had he been on duty and observed the same behavior.
The race baiters though, see it differently. Al Sharpton is calling for a federal investigation and tax cheat Charlie Rangel quipped that Barack Obama, who is in New York on a date with his wife (that no doubt cost taxpayers a fortune), better not go to Harlem without ID. The unspoken message is that it will be dangerous because white cops won’t recognize him, as if to say they all look alike. Maybe we can get Sharpton to run around without ID.
It is impossible for a police officer to know every other cop on the force. People somehow expect that they will but it is impossible. I can remember when I was in the Army people would say, oh do you know my brother So and So, he’s in the Army as if you know everyone in it. The New York cops don’t have as many members but they certainly have enough that one could not know them all.
But the race baiting community will make a big deal out of this and play the race card as long as they can. This is how they keep tensions high. It was a tragedy that the cop was killed and it will only be a bigger tragedy if they make this an issue about race. Here is how Rangel helped fuel the fire:
“Whether it’s me, whether it’s the [U.S.] attorney general, or indeed, whether it’s the President of the United States, running for a bus can jeopardize you – just because of your color – in a community like ours,” Rangel said. New York Daily News
Running for a bus can put you in jeopardy just because of your skin color? Rangel left out the very important part and that is running while brandishing a weapon is not how one tries to catch a bus. Running while brandishing a weapon will put anyone in jeopardy regardless of color though I am willing to bet that most crime in Harlem, whether it involves gun play or not, is committed by blacks.
And what does he mean “in a community like ours?” I thought there was no racism in the diverse Utopia known as Liberalism. Harlem is in no way , shape, or form, a conservative community. Harlem is an African American dominated area and the politicians are Democrats. Rangel represents the place so why would the shooting be racial?
In reality, there was no race component to it. An off duty cop who happened to be black was chasing a person while brandishing a weapon. He failed to identify himself and he failed to put the weapon down as instructed by a uniformed cop who happened to be white. He was then shot.
Tell the race baiters to leave and tell Rangel to spend more time working on his tax returns and less on on ginning up phony racism complaints.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: cop killer, harlem, Obama, race baiting, rangel, sharpton
Ironies And Gall Surround Obama
Mar 26, 2009 Political
It is interesting to watch the MEssiah as he goes about his business because he is a complete contradiction to what he presented during the campaign. I believe that if he had discussed all this spending and had actually said what he was going to do he would never have won. The guy is hailed as a gifted speaker but as soon as he is away from a teleprompter he stutters and stammers and sounds like the years of drug abuse affected the speech center of his brain.
I think it is like watching a folly and it would be rather amusing if it were not so potentially fatal. His policies and his aggressive, steamrolling tactics are sending us down the path to hell.
Look at the irony of Obama and his cronies coming after those who don’t pay their taxes. Bloomberg and the Wall Street Journal report that Obama is putting together a panel to overhaul the tax system so that they can get the 300 billion dollars that is not paid as it should be. Does it strike anyone as ironic that this statement is made?
“There are hundreds of billions of dollars in uncollected taxes each year,” Orszag said in a conference call. The Volcker board “will be examining ways of being even more aggressive on reducing the tax gap.” [Bloomberg]
The irony is that Tim Geithner was not the one who made the statement, Orszag was. Is it because Geithner was one of the tax cheats the overhaul is looking to detect? How ironic is it that Obama wants to go after tax cheats when the guy he picked to run Treasury is a tax cheat? How ironic is it that Charlie Rangel is a major tax cheat and is not being aggressively investigated? Obama wants new rules to crack down on YOU while the Democrats are full of tax cheats. How many of this guy’s picks had to bow out because of some tax problem?
It is amazing. It is like having a doctor who smokes tell you to give up cigarettes because they are bad for you or your pastor telling you to be faithful to your swife while he is having an affair. It is just wrong, it is hypocritical, and it is unmitigated gall.
I believe everyone should pay their fair share of taxes but I think members of government should be beyond reproach and this bunch is anything but.
Look at Obama’s press conference last night. I told you this guy would continue to blame Bush for as long as he could. It is interesting that he continues to blame Bush for the bad stuff but takes credit for the good stuff. If something good happens in Iraq we never hear Obama say that George Bush is responsible.
No, instead Obama will go on national TV and LIE. He said he inherited a 1.3 trillion dollar deficit. That is an absolute lie. Forgetting for a moment that Congress controls the purse strings, let’s look at the deficit numbers. At Gateway Pundit there is a chart that shows the deficit under Bush was slightly over 400 billion dollars at its highest point. The projected deficits for Obama are over a trillion dollars for the first two years and never drop below about 600 billion. The projection out to 2019 is just as bleak.
The numbers are only public debt and don’t include government to government debt or the numbers for everyone are enormous. Obama was lying when he said what he did or he was using a different set of numbers in order to make his case. The information comes from the Heritage Foundation and they report that Obama has quadrupled the debt with his stimulus package.
Obama also defended his reduction of the charitable contribution tax deductions for wealthier Americans saying that it would not lead to less money being donated basing this on some kind of evidence. I don’t really know what plant he hails from but on Earth the opposite has been demonstrated. As pointed out at Just One Minute (from a 2005 analysis):
The authors compile and contrast the results of a vast number of studies looking at the interplay of tax rates and charitable giving. Although people have many motivations for their philanthropy the conclusion of almost all of these studies points in the same direction – on net people give less when it costs them more.
Maybe on Krypton that is not a problem but on Earth people, even those who are very charitable, don’t give as much if it will cost them more. The Obama plan is a disincentive to give but then again, why would a liberal understand charity? It isn’t like they actually give much…
Finally, the lynch mob has taken its toll on one AIG executive. The New York Times published the letter of resignation of Jake DeSantis. Be sure to read his entire letter. The guy worked for a $1 a year based on the bonus that AIG was legally obligated to pay. Now Congress wants to take 90% of it as a punishment for a guy who had nothing to do with the problems and who stayed on to help.
I see more of these coming. In the end AIG will fail and we will be on the hook for billions of dollars. If we had let them fail in September we could have saved that money.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: aig, charity, Democrats, failure, geithner, irony, Obama, rangel, tax cheats, tax law
Democrats Rangel With Racial Politics
Sep 17, 2008 Political
I have heard, time and again, that people who do not vote for Obama are racists. It does not matter if you are 100% opposed to his political ideologies, if you don’t vote for him you are a racist. Not only are you a racist but you are denying the black community what they deserve. A female reporter named Fatimah Ali even says that it will cause a race war if people do not vote for Obama. I guess she thinks once you go Barack you never go back. She actually made the race war comment in a previous column. This week, after a few redneck crackers sent her emails, she is sure we are already in a race war.
I have little concern for this. I hardly see how 12% of the population could effect damage on 55% of it so a war in the traditional sense is probably not likely but I imagine there will be violence. If Obama wins there will be riots in celebration and if he loses there will be riots of anger. Either way cities will look like the Rodney King verdict all over again. Before you call me racist, I am merely expanding on what Ali wrote.
The Democrats and the black community (I know, redundant) are not afraid to point out any instance of perceived racism. They are so good at it they can listen to every day words and decide that they are racist code words for black people. I know that there will be some people who do not vote for Obama because he is black just as there are some people who will not vote for McCain because of his age. I hesitate to say that the 90% black vote for Obama has racist undertones because any Democrat, regardless of color, gets at least 90% of the vote. But there are definitely racial issues in the black community.
Charlie Rangel has been cooking his personal financial books for many years. His tax evasion and ethical violations have recently come to light and he is facing some serious problems. He was asked by Speaker Pelosi to step down as Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee (though Pelosi says she did not discuss it with him). Pelosi has a bit of a problem because even if she wanted to remove him she can’t.
The Congressional Black Caucus has put its support 100% behind Rangel and they will not allow him to be removed. This caucus has so much power that one member said “”Nancy won’t challenge us on this, even if she wants to.”
Now, here is a man who has broken any number of laws, infractions that would land us in jail, and the Black Caucus thinks that he should keep his position. These people must feel that it is perfectly OK for a person to break the law so long as he is black (and a Democrat). If Rangel were white or a Republican they would be barking at the moon trying to get him removed. Is it any wonder that people view the black groups with contempt? They expect justice unless one of their own is involved.
I guess we can chalk this up to affirmative action which seems to be playing big on the national spotlight. Obama is the affirmative action candidate and Rangel is the recipient of the benefits of affirmative action.
He won’t be removed from his position and that decision is based solely on his skin color. I have a dream that one day people will be judged by the content of their character and not the color of their skin.
Looks like Charlie has not had that dream yet. Good thing. If we judged him by the content of his character he would be in jail already.
Way to have that most ethical Congress Madam Speaker.
Also, Rangel was in the process of divorcing his wife of 40 years and she intimate knowledge of their finances. I believe that these disclosures came to light as a result of disclosures related to the divorce. Anyway, Rangel has called off the divorce. I think that might be so that she cannot be compelled to testify against him. This makes it even more apparent that he is guilty and knew what he was doing.
Thank Goodness we have the National Black Republican Association
Sources:
New York Times | The Crypt
Tags: black caucus, criminal, divorce, ethical, Pelosi, rangel, tax evasion
Pelosi’s Ethical Congress
Sep 16, 2008 Political
Nancy Pelosi made the same claim that every political leader of Congress makes and that is their version of the mob will be the most ethical in history. They are usually going to be the most open as well. Turns out that Pelosi’s reign is not over an ethical Democratic Congress but one that is full of abusers and law breakers. The past few years have seen the likes of Dodd, and Jefferson and now we have Charlie Rangel.
Rangel has been a criminal fro a long time. He wastes taxpayer money driving around in an expensive leased vehicle that the taxpayers get soaked for. He has more than the number of rent control apartments than he is allowed by law and he now has troubles with his taxes. Rangel owns property in the Dominican Republic and is facing an ethics investigation (as if that will matter) for evasion of taxes (related to income from the property), failure to report income and failure to disclose required items on his financial disclosure statement.
Rangel is chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee which means he has a lot to do with the tax laws in this country. Somehow, he was unable to follow the laws that he helped get passed. His finances are so messed up that he has had to hire a forensics accountant to figure out the problems.
Rangel is not being removed from his position. Why would he be? He is a Democrat so he is allowed to break the law and get away with it. Speaker Pelosi, Ms. more ethical Congress, is not (at least so far) removing him from his position. Republicans have a rule that if they are under investigation they must step down until it is over. The ethical Democrats have no such rule or their would not be enough of them left to run things.
Charlie Rangel has also said that he just had trouble with the language difference (as if he could not find someone in Harlem to interpret it). He is willing to pay what he owes and let’s be done with it.
Not so fast. If one of us had this problem the IRS would be bashing through our doors like a SWAT team and raping us with interest and penalties until we were left bankrupt. We would not be allowed to say we had trouble understanding anything. We would not be able to say “my bad” and just pay the taxes. No, we would get screwed to the wall.
I expect nothing less for the guy who is in charge of the tax rules. He needs to go down in flames. Pelosi needs to remove him from his position and he needs to be thoroughly scrutinized. He also needs to pay back taxes with interest and penalties no matter how much it adds up to.
This should take care of that arrogant jackass and it should remind the rest of them they are not above the law.
Wanna bet Pelosi does not remove him?
FWIW, I know there are Republicans who have problems. I want them in hot water as well.
Democrats Spin Failures into Successes – Reward Selves
Oct 27, 2007 Political
The Democrats took control of Congress in January and they planned to put their aggressive agenda into play. They had already promised America that they would be transparent and ethical. Since taking the reigns of power they have been neither transparent nor ethical. They have put billions of dollars of earmarks into legislation and often done so under the cloak of darkness. There are even earmarks for organizations no one can prove exist and those earmarks passed despite concerns that the recipients might not actually be around. The fact that Jack Murtha put in those earmarks should concern everyone as Murtha was caught on video tape trying to take a bribe.
The Democrats said they would go to a 5 day workweek. They have trouble with math because the day starts in the evening on Monday and they are done by noon on Friday. To these people, that is a 5 day workweek. Now the Democrats plan to reward themselves for all the “hard” work they have done by reducing the workweek starting next year. They claim that it is to give them more time in their districts but we all know it is so they can campaign and work to get a bigger control of the Congress. Everything they do is designed to get more votes and greater power. Rangel’s tax scheme is designed to have minimal impact on people making less than $150k (individual) or $200k (couple) because the Democratic base largely falls under those targets. The tax increase is designed to hurt people who generally vote Republican so basically, the tax increase is designed to make Republicans pay for government and social programs and to get more Democrats elected.
Many of the Democrats are justifying the short workweeks scheduled for next year by claiming that they worked really hard this year. Some claim they had to work hard to clean up the messes of 12 years of a Republican majority and some claim that they need to spend more time with their constituents. I want to know how they have not had enough time already. Every time there is a federal holiday they get the entire week off. They take the entire month of August off and they take time off whenever they feel a need to be in their districts or to attend a meeting paid for by some lobbyist. They are a disgrace and can lay little claim to success for this year. Their crowning achievement, to them, is passage of a minimum wage increase. They act as if this was some big deal and they did what they promised but the fact is, they attached this increase to a war funding bill that had nothing to do with a minimum wage increase. They did this because they could not have gotten it passed otherwise.
In reality, the Democrats have been dismal failures this year. But they still thump their chests and claim they did a great job so they want to work fewer days a week next year. They have complaints because they have not gotten a pay raise and they have families at home who they would like to spend time with. Well boo frickin hoo. The members of our military have families from whom they are separated and they do not get a week off for the holidays and they do not get a month off at a time. They do their jobs and they get paid a hell of a lot less than members of Congress, who are overpaid for the work they actually do.
I have an idea. Most people who have real jobs work about 240 days a year (excluding any vacation they might take). How about if Congress has a schedule where they must work 240 days a year to get paid. They can either work 3 weeks a month in DC and spend 1 week each month at home or they can work 4 days a week (days that must add up to at least 40 hours) and spend Friday-Sunday at home. They may also have off the normal federal holidays AND ONLY THOSE HOLIDAYS (not the entire week). Each member must spend 240 days a year working in DC on the job or they do not get paid.
Instead of patting themselves on the back and giving themselves rewards, Democrats should be asking why the approval rating of Congress is near single digits. Perhaps they should be worrying about why they are failing to accomplish anything that they are supposed to do as in approve a budget.
I think if they want to spend more time in their districts we should replace them in the next election so that the job will not be such a burden to them.
Source:
New York Times
Tags: bribe, Congress, constituents, democratic base, Democrats, earmarks, rangel, social programs, tax increase, tax scheme