08.03.05
“Where are the race hustlers?” asks Michelle Malkin. I guess allegedly stealing money from poor black kids in New York is OK with the irreverent “reverends” if you’re a white liberal.
Solid gold stuff. Also see Ed Morrissey’s coverage.
Related:
See The RadioEqualizer’s post on Selective Outrage.
Update: The RadioEqualizer catches BoreAmerica in a loan lie.
Also, Michelle Malkin’s third book is coming out in October. That means I’ve got to get mine out no later than January 2006…
43 Comments
Heh. I guess if there is no bank or company to shakedown, the Rainbow PUSH coalition has other things to do. That, and the good Rev. J has a rocky history with “Hymie Town”. Anybody else remember that old Murphy bit?
Comment by SCSIwuzzy — 08.03.05 @ 9:28 am
You know, although I hate the term ‘race hustler’ and ‘poverty pimp’ both of which I think are ridiculous, one thing I 100% unequivically agree with you on is this statement right here from you irreverent reverends thread:
“Black liberals unconditionally support a political agenda that dehumanizes the unborn, yet base their “need†for government entitlements and privileges on the history of the dehumanization of their ancestors! - LaShawn”
On another board I have been debating a pro-choice (and intelligent) woman on abortion based upon my “I Want My Sperm Back Campaign” on my blog, and in it I parrelled what happened in slavery versus what is happening in abortion. The dehumanization of the African, the pseudo-scientific justification, the moral justification etc. for slavery, and the same arguments are being used in the abortion debate.
I don’t criticize them for taking stands on race issues, I criticize them for selling out their own people for democratic political gain in the areas of abortion, and in situations like you mentioned above LaShawn, where they should be speaking up and instead are silent.
Suckers.
Comment by Dell Gines — 08.03.05 @ 9:39 am
SCSI,
I have the Best of Eddie Murphy from Saturday night live and watched that just this weekend (the Hymie Town piece).
Comment by Renee (the Orignal) — 08.03.05 @ 9:53 am
Headlines
Student turns down ACLU’s scholarship Hat tip: Stop the ACLU Bush Endorses Teaching Intelligent Design to Students Open-minded…
Trackback by Danny Carlton: codenamed "Jack Lewis" — 08.03.05 @ 10:10 am
“Pro Choice” and “intelligent” in the same sentence….nice.
Comment by Raymond — 08.03.05 @ 10:16 am
La Shawn:
Again, this money for “Poor Black Children” is extracted from taxpayers. It really doesn’t have their name, or Air America’s name on it.
The “Poor Black Children” have become a “buzzword” for Michelle Malkin and others trying to create a stir.
But a stir is needed - to expose the fraud.
Withoud the ‘Race Warlords” to come to their rescue, perhaps these children do need some help - from people like Michelle and you.
Comment by Frank Zavisca — 08.03.05 @ 10:24 am
Frank,
The money that Gloria Wise either knowingly or unknowingly transferred to Air America came from city grants earmarked for specific programs serving economically disadvantaged youths in Brooklyn. Earmarked grant money has to be spent on the program itself. The fact that Gloria Wise did not have the funds to serve that program (and others) was what led to the investigation in the first place.
In fact, that money DID have their names on it.
Comment by Captain Ed — 08.03.05 @ 10:57 am
“Withoud the ‘Race Warlords†to come to their rescue, perhaps these children do need some help -from people like Michelle and you.”
What they really need is for both of their parents to be there, stay out of jail, off drugs and do their job as parents.
Quit blaming pundits, bloggers, or others for the failure of parents and the community itself to do their job. Since when is it the government’s job anyway?
Over $400K was diverted. There was a scam here in Dallas where a woman defrauded her foster care organization and it was front page news. How is the Air Ameriscam fraud any different?
Comment by Chris Roberts — 08.03.05 @ 12:35 pm
What I don’t understand is why I cannont post a comment on any of these message boards. I know my comments state beliefs that are contrary to what La Shawn might think, but should they not be heard. What is the use of having comments if not everyone can comment or the comments are censored to reflect one view?
If you can refrain from attacking me or, at this point, addressing me directly, you may comment. Stick to the post and don’t pontificate on what a “black woman” like myself should or shouldn’t be writing. - Admin
Comment by Maxxdogg — 08.03.05 @ 12:39 pm
I’ve dealt with you before, “Scoobie,” and you’re a vulgarian and not welcome on this blog.
Comment by Scoobie — 08.03.05 @ 12:46 pm
Ok…so can you repost the comment I made on this board? It stuck to the point and did not refer to you at all.
It went something like this…sarcasm removed.
Michelle Malkin became popular because of her very controversial book titled “In Defense of Internment.” In this book she stated her belief that the Asian-American internment was justified. So one could argue that Michelle Malkin bolstered her career with the belief that sometimes oppressing minorities and impoverished is acceptable.
But now she is really concerned about “poor black kids.” To me this seems very disenguous, ironic, hypocritcal, conservative and republican (take your pick).
Comment by Maxxdogg — 08.03.05 @ 12:55 pm
Way, way off. Michelle was popular before that book. Her decade-long editorial writing career and first book, Invasion, which exposed America’s lax and suicidal immigration non-enforcement, are what put her on the map.
As far as In Defense of Internment goes, you’re all twisted up, Maxxdogg. Michelle argued that the safety of Americans during war time takes precedence over civil liberties and ethnic grievance concerns. How you jump from that to calling Americans of Japanese descent “impoverished” is…strange.
Before you come up with more off-the-mark theories, read the book. At the very least, read a few items on this page:
http://michellemalkin.com/books.htm
Comment by La Shawn — 08.03.05 @ 1:02 pm
That hurts my feelings. Yes, my previous post suggesting that … was in poor taste, but nobody took it seriously and I removed the reference after people complained. However, I think Moon’s charity scams are something that should be discussed. You people on the right love all the money Moon gives and the propaganda from the Moonie Times (e.g., http://dailyhowler.com/h111201_1.shtml ), however this blinds you from Moon’s real agenda: a Moonie-centered theocracy. I think the topic of Moon should be one in which there is common ground from the left and the right.
BTW, Scoobie is what I’m known as due to an incredibly high metabolism.
I give you a chance, and what do you do? Talk bad about me on your blog. I didn’t ban you; I approved your comment. But thanks to your blog post, you’re banned now. - Admin
Comment by Scoobie — 08.03.05 @ 1:04 pm
Well, I wouldn’t say I am way off. She may have gained some notoriety from her previous work, but it was her second book and the controversy surrounding it that brought her to the masses.
I am not mixed up at all about her book. She argues that there are instances in which civil liberties and racism in the form of racial profiling is acceptable. In this case the safety of Americans took precedence over both.
I mention “impoverished” because the Asian-Americans of that time were such. They were not being interned for being impoverished…of course. However, if the Asian American of that time were more wealthy socially and economically I highly doubt they would have been interned. That is one factor that made internment possible.
Thanks for letting me post, La Shawn
(no sarcasm here…THANK YOU!)
Comment by Maxxdogg — 08.03.05 @ 1:21 pm
MaxxDog wrote, “Michelle Malkin became popular because of her very controversial book titled “In Defense of Internment.†”
Michelle was way popular years before her book. I’ve read her columns (before her blogging) before 9/11. An accusational statement doesn’t make it true. That one was incorrect.
I suggest you read the book before making even more incorrect misrepresentations. How would you like it if you wrote a book and had others just mischaracterize it. Thanks.
Comment by Baklava — 08.03.05 @ 1:24 pm
Maxx - Racial profiling, especially for certain crimes, is neither racist nor illegal. Since the beginning of time, I’m sure, law enforcers have profiled the kind of people who commit certain kind of crimes in order to catch them and/or prevent the crimes. The sensibilities of black Americans and paternalistic white liberals like yourself don’t change the fact that if certain people commit certain crimes in disproportionate numbers, or if the race of a suspect is known, it would be hare-brained and irresponsible for law enforcement types NOT to profile that kind of person in order to protect citizens.
Let’s say a black man known as the “Raper of Other Men’s Wives” was going around your neighborhood raping men’s wives, and you have a wife. And daughters. I am 100 percent certain you’d want the cops to focus on young black men hanging around your neighborhood, especially those who don’t live there and with rape and violence on their rap sheets. You wouldn’t consider that racist in the least. You know why? Because it’s not!
Scoobie - Can’t help your hurt feelings. You certainly didn’t care anything about mine.
Don’t know what money you’re talking about. As for Moon owning the paper, as long as his kookie views aren’t espoused on its pages, I support the publication. It would interesting to investigate who owns what in this country. I’m sure you’d find out worse things than a religious kook owning a newspaper.
Comment by La Shawn — 08.03.05 @ 1:27 pm
to Captain Ed:
Sorry - earmarked grant money comes from taxpayers. The money did NOT have “Poor Black Kids” marked on it before it was forcefully taken from taxpayers. Only afterward.
No doubt Air America obtained some of the money by fraud, but Chris Roberts sums it up. “Poor Black Kids” are there because of incompetent parenting, and there just is no reason these incompetent parents have more right to this tax money than the taxpayers it was forcefully taken from.
Comment by Frank Zavisca — 08.03.05 @ 1:31 pm
I don’t think I mischaracterized Malkin’s book at all. She thinks there are times when “civil liberties” and “ethnic grievances” can be overlooked, such as in the case of the safety of Americans. At least this is how La Shawn explains it to me.
I disagree with that very controversial concept. Malkin does not. However, now you hail her as a defender of minorities. How ironic.
Also, just because you knew who Malkin was before her book does not make her “popular.” I’m sure if you did a graph of her media appearances before and after the book…you would see a huge spike after the book. Can you at least admin that?
Comment by Maxxdogg — 08.03.05 @ 1:44 pm
This is a stupid conversation, Maxx, the sort of thing I try to avoid wasting time on. I don’t care whether Michelle is a “defender of minority rights” or not, whatever the heck that means, and I certainly never said she was. If you have no interest in reading the book or her comments about it, I have no interest in discussing her thesis with you. I’m through talking in circles. As I said, mind your manners, and I’ll approve your comments, but try to direct them to other commenters.
Comment by La Shawn — 08.03.05 @ 1:50 pm
“The sensibilities of black Americans and paternalistic white liberals like yourself don’t change the fact that if certain people commit certain crimes in disproportionate numbers, or if the race of a suspect is known, it would be hare-brained and irresponsible for law enforcement types NOT to profile that kind of person in order to protect citizens.”
There are more black people in jail than any other race. Therefore, it could be argued that these “certain people”(ie black people) commit crime in disproportionate numbers. Therefore, by your own reasoning, all black people should be profiled?
That is ridiculous. I would call it racist here and I would call it racist in the example you gave above.
You’re darn right it’s ridiculous! This back and forth is imbecilic! THIS is why we’re talking in circles, Maxx, and you’re purposely not seeing the distinction: FOCUS on my example and stop making wild statements about “all black people” being profiled. It could also be argued that there are more blacks in jail because blacks commit more crimes. Why is stating a FACT racist, for crying out loud? Address what I wrote in the previous comment before going on anymore tangents. - Admin
Comment by Maxxdogg — 08.03.05 @ 2:07 pm
Maxx, if MM writes mainly to conservatives, then it stands to reason that many well-read conservative would be as familiar with her work as with Brent Boswell, Larry Elder etc, etc. Remember, if the recent elections were any indication, there’s more of us conservatives than you liberals.
To wit, Maureen Downd may have been ‘well known’ by dint of her NYT platform, but it sure didn’t make her popular, except as fodder for the ritual fisking.
Just because YOU didn’t become aware of MM until after dKos and other lefty blogs became popular in your circles, doesn’t mean that she wasn’t well known while they were yet unkowns.
So instead of repeating talking lefty points, show a little initiative and discover who she is and what she thinks on your own, instead of drinking the koolade straight up. You’ll find that most of the Japanese wanted the security of the internment to get away from the lynch mobs and others looking for revenge on Pearl Harbor — IOW, the camps were designed to keep others out, not keep the Japanese Americans in. Talk/read/listen to the people and their accounts of who were there and experienced it and not the PC revisionists.
Even her biggest scholarly critic, Eric Whatizface couldn’t refute her research and was reduced to making ad homimen attacks on her, all because the facts weren’t on his side.
At least when you make your own koolade, it’ll taste better.
Comment by Andy — 08.03.05 @ 2:11 pm
LB,
Some days I would love to see your IP log, and compare them to the names some posters give. It might be as interesting as seeing who owns what news papers
Comment by SCSIwuzzy — 08.03.05 @ 2:15 pm
Max wrote, “Can you at least admin that?”
I’ll admin (sp) to the fact that she has grown in popularity each year and probably a small bit after her book. She was well known by conservatives and now well known by liberals after her book.
It’s always good to second guess actions (of FDR-a Democrat) after a War (WW2) and then not take into account whether or not we would’ve won the war or not. Which is what Michelle takes into account. She takes the “feel good” history rewriters mentality and reminds them that there wer REASONS that FDR made the decisions he made.
Michelle details how Japanese citizens in this country were helping the Japanese country during WW2. She detailed it extensively. She also details that the same was true for Germans and that an approximate equal percentage of Germans were in interned. She also details that for the Japanese citizens safety many understood the reality that they needed to be interned because to not be interned might’ve been disastrous for their lives as new information kept coming out about Japanese-American citizens helping the Japanese country.
If you DON’T read the book, you can make any statement you want and be incorrect. Will you admin (sp) to that?
Oh. I see Andy made some of my points…
Comment by Baklava — 08.03.05 @ 2:21 pm
Oh, oh, Andy. The last guy who used “drinking the koolade” on this blog was labeled a “racist” by the object of his remark. Can’t remember the guy’s name, but he’s obviously a racist.
Comment by Kevin — 08.03.05 @ 2:21 pm
Oh how relevant the Denzel Washington-Bruce Willis movie “The Seige” is now. Unfortunatley in this movie like in “John Q”, Denzel’s talents were used for evil. He played the apologist liberal.
Interesting in that Denzel is one of the greatest friends the US military has.
Comment by Raymond — 08.03.05 @ 2:31 pm
I guess you guys would then have to call Andy an “Uncle Tom” or sellout for the koolaid remark.
What should he have called it??? Hawaiian Punch? Lemonade? Coke? Pepsi? Budweiser?
Ritual fisking? What kind of ceremonies are required? Methinks I fisk reguarly, but I’m not sure if I’m a ritual fisker.
Comment by Chris Roberts — 08.03.05 @ 2:43 pm
La Shawn,
The previous comment asssumed I am white and living in an all white neighborhood. If it were a black neighborhood, and the rapist was black, does your theory still apply? I doubt it. The community might get a little upset when the cops start harrassing the entire neighborhood.
Also, Why don’t you just say it.
Black commit more crime. Mexicans commit more crime. Muslims blow themselves up more. Surely these aren’t racist comments…just factual.
Do you believe black people commit more crimes and therefore should be profiled? Is that what you truly believe? Have you yourself ever been profiled? If so, did you accept it and agree with your own profiling?
Comment by Maxxdogg — 08.03.05 @ 2:49 pm
Maxx, as someone black who grew up in a black neighborhood, unlike you, I can say with 100 percent certainty that the “community” would NOT be upset with cops for watching criminally-prone black men lurking around their neighborhoods. If you have any vacation days left, come to DC and hang out in gang-infested projects and find out for yourself if the “community” is upset because the cops racially profile. You watch too much TV.
This is why I don’t like dealing with white liberals and their ivory-tower, paternalistic theories about race. They don’t know what the heck they’re talking about. First, you presume that black men don’t want to keep their women safe. Second, you presume that most black men in a given neighborhood are criminals. I made reference to a specific kind of black man: young, doesn’t live in the area, and has rape and violence on his rap sheet, and you come back with how blacks might “get a little upset” if cops do their darn jobs! Typical liberal tripe.
I think you’ve commented enough for today. Your “concern” for black folks is wearing me out.
Comment by La Shawn — 08.03.05 @ 3:03 pm
A couple of comments:
1. As to where the big-name libs are, I can only repeat my brother’s theory about libs and how they think. There are two kinds of ‘truths’, macro and micro. For the libs, ‘macro’ truth is that they CARE about people and are CONCERNED about them, and we need to give them our money and obedience so they can carry on with their good work. Micro truths like “it’s wrong to defraud a charity” or “you shouldn’t do things like that with an intern” carry no weight when compared to the macro truth.
2. As far as odd controversy about Michelle Malkin, this seems to be par for the course for a conservative minority. Apparently, because she didn’t wax hysterical over the internment of Japanese in World War II, she has no right to be indignant because (apparently) Air America has defrauded a minority charity.
Comment by docjim505 — 08.03.05 @ 3:04 pm
I’d be honored to be called an Uncle Tom. His Christlike meekness, forebearance and humility is certianly worth emulating. Unfortunately, I’ve got a hot temper, so I’ve got a ways to go yet on that front. Oh well…PBPGINFWMY
Comment by Andy — 08.03.05 @ 3:58 pm
Max wrote, “Do you believe black people commit more crimes and therefore should be profiled? ”
That isn’t the relevant question. The relevant question would be, “Should the cops be hamstrung or allowed to look at the data and then do their job?”
For instance, if between the years 1998 and 2005 there were 10 instances of terrorism or raping and each of the 10 instances of terror or raping the PROFESSIONALS were able to piece together a portrait or “profile” of the perpetrators, should the PROFESSIONALS be hamstrung or can they create the search criteria they think they should be looking for? I mean why be looking at white women in the neighborhood if each of the 10 victims were able to give a portrait that looked like a [insert specific race here] man between the ages of [insert age here] with a height of [insert height here]. Same thing with the professionals doing their job with respect to terrorism.
It makes absolutely NO SENSE to waste the precious security resources we have to satisfy liberals like yourself by almost guranteeing that we aren’t being smart in our search efforts.
Comment by Baklava — 08.03.05 @ 4:00 pm
Since we are on the topic of white liberals…I got banned from democratic undergound about 3 or 4 times…you know why? For challenging them on issues of blackness, and telling them that abortion is killing black children at an alarming rate…
Pompous…
Comment by Dell Gines — 08.03.05 @ 4:23 pm
Now Dell, what do white liberals care about dead black people, babies or otherwise, unless they’re fully-grown cop-killing, white-people-hating murderers facing death row and college speaking engagements?
Comment by La Shawn — 08.03.05 @ 4:33 pm
LB…yes, I found that out. This is what amazes me about people who want ‘tolerance’, they really want other folks to be tolerant, but they want to retain the right to not be tolerant themselves.
See the problem with white liberalism, is the fact that at least at the elite level in politics, they have no real interest in the black american apart from the voting block they represent (I suppose you could make the case that this goes on in both parties). I know this by the lack of any real substantive issues relating to the black American on any national agenda plate.
Then you go to a place like democratic underground, which seems to be a having for abortionist, and homosexuals, and state a definitive position based upon the black experience and you get banned. Hummm…the thing about the Republicans (note I didn’t say conservatives) is at least they have a premise for their argumentation even though the premise is often short sighted and myopic…so there is room for debate…liberals have no clue as to what they really believe or stand for…
Comment by Dell Gines — 08.03.05 @ 4:45 pm
Irreverent reverends? I didn’t read the post, but what about DCs own Willie Wilson? “My son can’t get a date for the prom because there’s too many lesbians” and “lesbians are taking over DC”.
Why did you keep coming back here, Chuck? - Admin
Comment by Chuck — 08.03.05 @ 6:18 pm
I keep coming here because I choose to. I recognize that I made some untoward comments a couple of weeks ago and I make no excuses for my actions, only apologies.
Comment by Chuck — 08.04.05 @ 5:47 am
Arnold Kramer, professor of history at Texas A&M, wrote a phenomenally documented book called Undue Process: The Untold Story of America’s German Alien Internees. About half of the internees during WW 11 were white. There were Italian-Americans(3,278), and German-Americans (10,905). In fact, the US actually began to intern German and Italian merchant seaman while the US was still officially neutral, which is a breach of international law. Yet, it is widely taught in the US that Japanese internment was racially motivated, a notion which is used so often to lend creedence to flawed theories. When are we going to learn that truth should be the goal of education, not political ideology? When will we learn that truth is ultimately what will liberate us from hatred? And, when will liberals (not all) who are so busy indulging in their arrogant pasttime as ‘the great architects of a better, more tolerant society’ realize that they are crucifying us collectively on the altar of their bad ideas?
Incidentally, to say that Michelle Malkin has to cut her credentials as a critic of this, that, and the other, before she is ‘allowed’ to express her views on an issue, as some have intimated, is a flawed concept. Further, race or gender does not bestow ownership on an issue. As a journalist, Malkin has paid her dues through research, incisive writing, and cutting edge commentary. That’s what qualifies her.
And, yes, I’m back, if you’ll have me. Smiles…..
Comment by jan brauner — 08.04.05 @ 11:32 am
#33
La Shawn, since you’ve indirectly brought up Wesley Cook (AKA Mumia), if folks are sick of giving money to Ben and Jerry’s only to see it find it’s way into causes like freeing cop killing thugs, check out Star Spangled Ice Cream.
They are based out of Baltimore, and have in store sales in MD and VA. You (LB) ought to be able to get some without trouble.
They give a portion of their profits to the boys and girls of our armed forces, and are every bit as good as B&Js.
Google the name to get their site, and you can see their flavors (like Iraqi Road and I hate the French Vanila) and have pints overnighted to the lower 48.
Comment by SCSIwuzzy — 08.04.05 @ 11:39 am
But, but, but Jan, we’re a goal-based society and truth is not relevant. In order to be color-blind, we have to acknowledge and promote race as a factor. [/sarcasm]
Welcome back.
Comment by Andy — 08.04.05 @ 12:21 pm
Jan #37,
Yes. Michelle Malkin outlined in her book that the 50% or so that were interned were not Japanese.
Hugs…
Comment by Baklava — 08.04.05 @ 12:39 pm
Andy and Baklava;
Hugs back atcha’!
Comment by jan brauner — 08.04.05 @ 1:33 pm
You’re addicted. You can’t leave if you tried.
Comment by Baklava — 08.04.05 @ 1:40 pm
You think I’m that dense? - Admin
Comment by Scoobie — 08.04.05 @ 3:47 pm