Showing posts with label race. Show all posts
Showing posts with label race. Show all posts

Thursday, April 5, 2012

Lights, camera, Sharpton!

The classic image of the Hollywood movie set features a gruff director -- wearing a beret and chomping a cigar -- bellowing, "Lights, camera, action!" The actors then perform their roles. In Sanford, Florida the director might shout, "Lights, camera, Sharpton!"

Although Al Sharpton is a devout blowhard, let's give the devil his due. Whenever there's race to hustle or cameras to hog, he never misses his cue. In the wake of Trayvon Martin's untimely demise, Sharpton delivered a
timeless line to the teen's parents: "they will try to make your son a junkie, thief, assaulter, everything else before this is over."

It's theatrical history, Mr. Sharpton starring in a role for which he's uniquely qualified, dividing public opinion. His concern over that fateful night when one life ended and another was forever altered is purely professional. Sharpton is an actor, a caped civil rights crusader manipulating Trayvon's death to build his own street cred. It's a role he's played many times over.

Remember the Duke Lacrosse case, when white lacrosse players were accused of raping Crystal Mangum, a black stripper? Al Sharpton declared the accused guilty without a shred of substantiating evidence. Rich, powerful, white men had abused a vulnerable black woman, as if the scene had played out on an 18th Century southern plantation. Anyone who questioned Mangum's story was racist, sexist, and probably a few other things.

There was only one problem. Mangum wasn't a victim; she was a lying
fraud. Ensuing scenes found her convicted of child abuse and charged with the stabbing death of her boyfriend. But before Mangum's story reached its ugly climax Sharpton had long since left the stage.

Sharpton played a similar role in Louisiana's Jena Six case. The script reverberated with racial injustice when Mychal Bell was arrested for beating a white classmate. The cameras rolled and Al delivered in all his demagogic glory. Sharpton's dramatic monologues declared Bell the victim of blatant racism at a racist high school in a racist southern town. However, Mychal Bell turned out to be everything his critics had said, and Jena's systemic racism was pure
hype. When the scene ended and the set fell dark, Bell remained in jail and Sharpton had disappeared quicker than September snow.

Since Al Sharpton claims the title of reverend, it's fitting for his marquee to come directly from biblical
text, “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves." Al plays the role of the sympathetic civil rights crusader. Inwardly he's a publicity hog, Kim Kardashian without the buxom figure.

Evidence to date can
neither exonerate nor convict George Zimmerman for Trayvon's death. Jumping to either conclusion is foolishly immature. But identifying Al Sharpton as a race-hustler is verifiable. He flawlessly performs the black leader's role, only to vanish without a trace just prior to the scene's climax. Keep a close eye on Sanford, Florida. Al Sharpton's latest performance is can't-miss theatre.

Wednesday, October 27, 2010

The five myths of Regressive politics #1: Conservatives are racist.

Whenever conservatives comment on racial issues they’re immediately compared to the Grand Dragons of the Ku Klux Klan. Such an accusation would be laughable if it weren’t so egregious. In reality conservatives are the colorblind idealists. Since all that’s rightly promised to free people is an opportunity to use their talents for their own benefit, conservatives recognize that preferential treatment based on race or ethnicity are themselves discriminatory. Quotas aren’t necessary for success, nor are head starts required.

In reality, applying quota and preference programs to people of color is condescending. Racial quota systems promote the idea that minorities are inferior and needful of preferential treatment. Conservatives recognize the duplicitous fallacy in this argument. Therefore, under conservatism, people are evaluated on their merits, with financial compensation and cultural status reflecting each individual’s contribution to society.

In conservative thought equality means a known starting point, no more. No one is elevated or relegated based on race and no preference is given beyond that which is due to the skills and attitudes a person presents.

The left is correct in one thing; racism does endure in America. However, its home is on the political left. Liberals have no faith in minorities regardless of the preening and crowing they do on behalf of the disenfranchised. Minorities cannot succeed without the left-wing do-gooder’s social justice activism and government assistance. Success can result from welfare and entitlement programs, hiring quotas, college admission preferences, or some other means. But success must be attributable to government.

The true crime of political racism is perpetrated daily on the left. Liberal politicians work diligently to convince minorities that life is worthless and unlivable without expansive government programs, thereby maintaining their grip on power. The fact that these programs are a proven snare, trapping recipients in an endless stream of dependence is immaterial. All that matters is the electoral power that can be attained and the governmental control that can be expanded.

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

It’s time to put your pants back on

Most fashion trends fade as quickly as they appear. The 1960s produced Nehru jackets and bell-bottom pants. Multi-colored toe socks and leisure suits permeated the 70s. Members Only jackets and parachute pants marked the Reagan era and black rain coats and unlaced boots ruled the 90s.

Fortunately, these trendy fashions came and went in relative short order. That is the rule for fads; they flame out like cheap jet engines. However, one fad has refused to follow the axiom. It’s one that never should’ve begun and, sadly, shows no sign of decline. When will the youthful obsession with the saggy pants end?

Several municipalities have enacted ordinances to halt the downward migration of trousers. In 2008 the Chicago suburb of
Lynwood imposed a $25 fine for exposing three inches or more of underwear. Lynwood isn’t alone. Cities of diverse population and culture have enacted bans on saggy pants, with penalties ranging from fines to jail time.

Outlawing the practice, especially with incarceration, seems a bit exaggerated. Saggy pants are decidedly tasteless, but reveal no flesh. Laws already exist to deal with indecent exposure and no law can eliminate stupidity. Furthermore, if the wearer is too dense to comprehend the ridiculousness of their condition they’re likely too dense to understand explanations of that fact.

Unlike politicians who pretend all societal ills are remedied with a fresh set of laws, I understand that such laws only fuel the rebellious attitude that placed saggy pants in vogue. I also understand that the opinion of a middle-aged man won’t convince the saggy pants wearer that they look foolish. Therefore I enlisted the aid of some genuine experts.

Young guys have long adopted actions that older men know is ridiculous. But another constant are young men’s desires to attract young women. So I asked a few such women for their opinions on saggy pants. These ladies are 18, 19, and 20-years-old, respectively. All are friendly, humorous and thoroughly attractive. They are everything a young man would like to take to a Saturday night movie. Get this, guys, your underwear doesn’t impress them.

Amanda is a senior at East Lincoln High School (Denver, NC). She finds nothing cool about your saggy pants or the “bad boy” image they convey; you only appear trashy and disrespectful. If you show up at her house with your pants slung low you’ll be leaving alone. “The look isn’t attractive at all,” she says with a look of near disgust.

Michelle, a senior at East Gaston High School (Mt. Holly, NC) echoes Amanda’s sentiments, only more pointedly. She just doesn’t want to see your underwear regardless of the name on the waste band. “Saggy pants show that you have no future and don’t care about your appearance,” says Michelle. The failure to wear pants where they belong also causes her to question the wearer’s personal hygiene.

“It’s improper and rude,” adds Haley, a recent college graduate. Haley thinks saggy pants makes a guy look thuggish, immature and lazy, especially since the pants are purposefully worn that way. Low-slung trousers win no compliments from her, making even the cutest guy “completely unattractive.”

Low ridding pants differ from previous youthful fashions only in appearance. The intent is the same, to prove independence and individuality by contradicting established cultural norms. But that is flawed thinking. How does someone express their individuality by mimicking what the group does? How does one prove independence by following the crowd?

If clothing’s only purpose were to conceal nakedness we would all wear sackcloth. Clothing does convey the wearer’s attitudes. Guys, wearing your pants below your buttocks informs these three ladies that you’re trashy, unkempt, unmotivated and disrespectful. Do yourself a favor and pull up your pants. If not for the sake of decency and decorum, for the young ladies you try to attract.