Wednesday, October 14, 2015

Leftist Target Painting and Tribal Shaming

I haven’t decided on a candidate for president. However, I’m fascinated by the Left’s response to GOP candidate Dr. Benjamin Carson. His fearlessness mixed with soft-spoken unflappability is powerful. And this quality seems to have the effect of burning coals on the collective heads of the Left—when it’s not causing said heads to explode.

For this reason, the word is out on GOP candidate Dr. Carson. It started with his September remarks on whether a devout Muslim should be president. Like all of the other “controversial” remarks he has made, Carson wasn’t’ just volunteering information. He was asked whether a president’s faith mattered by Chuck Todd on Meet the Press.
CHUCK TODD: Let me ask you the question this way: Should a President’s faith matter? Should your faith matter to voters? 
DR. BEN CARSON: Well, I guess it depends on what that faith is. If it’s inconsistent with the values and principles of America, then of course it should matter. But if it fits within the realm of America and consistent with the constitution, no problem.
CHUCK TODD: So do you believe that Islam is consistent with the constitution?
DR. BEN CARSON: No, I don’t, I do not. … I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not agree with that.
I’ll leave aside the theory that America already has a Muslim in charge.

Of course, the leading Muslim Brotherhood entity—CAIR—called on Carson to quit the presidential race. (It occurs to me that CAIR believes that it controls blacks--a mindset which, likely, stems from 1400 year-long and counting pillage of Africa by Islamic entities ranging from the Ottoman Empire to Boko Haram.) But the other-directed Carson ignored the snarling of those wolves.

The following month, in the wake of the Oregon mass-shooting—during which the shooter reportedly targeted Christians--Carson was asked what he would have done under such circumstances. His response:
Not only would I probably not cooperate with him, I would not just stand there and let him shoot me, I would say, ‘Hey guys, everybody attack him. He may shoot me, but he can’t get us all.'
Related to the previous question, Carson was asked by CNN’s Wolf Blitzer about the Jews, murdered by Hitler and his minions:
The likelihood of Hitler being able to accomplish his goals would have been greatly diminished if the people had been armed.
I find it interesting that people fabricate offense at Dr. Carson’s remarks. They claim that he is blaming the victims of these crimes, but it is actually the accusers of Dr. Carson who betray their own mindset. They are using a subset of Rapist Logic. Perhaps the Oregon victims and the Holocaust victims should have just urinated on their assailants.

The Bielski Partisans, a less well-known Jewish Resistance cell during WWII, however, fart in the general direction of the perpetually offended.
The Bielskis had been a Jewish farming family in the nearby village of Stankiewicze [Belarus], and the brothers knew the region well. Their familiarity with its geography, customs, and people helped them elude the German authorities and their Belorussian auxiliaries. With the help of non-Jewish Belorussian friends, they were able to acquire guns. The Bielski partisans later supplemented these arms with captured German weapons, Soviet weapons, and equipment supplied by Soviet partisans.
After World War II, in 1945 Tuvia and Zus Bielski emigrated with their families to Palestine. They both fought in the Israeli armed forces during the 1948 war that established the Israeli state. They subsequently immigrated to the United States.
But even before these interviews, there was University of Pennsylvania professor of dog-whistling Religious Studies Anthea Butler:

This was in response to the fact that Carson is insufficiently concerned about the Confederate Battle flag being flown at NASCAR events.

And, in response to Carson's Holocaust comments, actor Seth Rogen--who is Jewish--put forth this eloquent argument.

Fuck you @RealBenCarson.

— Seth Rogen (@Sethrogen) October 9, 2015

I doubt that Dr. Carson cares what such people call him or say to him—as a man of true education and real accomplishments, it is certain that, in the past, other black Americans have slung ugly racial epithets in his direction. This is the lot of black Americans who break out of the disease of anti-intellectualism which besets all too many of us.

But, Cobb says that this is dog-whistling and I agree because the “dogs” have been barking and growling since then. It’s the painting of a target.

Most of the Left's tactics against conservatives who are black are meant to incite shame in the targets. The interesting thing about this flawed tactic is that the Left assumes that race-based epithets—like “coon”--will do this because most blacks are "proud" of their race. But, for a person who does not believe his race to be inferior or superior, racial shaming rolls right off of their backs.

Of course, the attempt must be made to shame free men like Carson in order to bring them back under the protection of the Left Wing. (A secondary purpose is to induce fear in black observers who have the potential to become free—to shut them up.) But, ironically, neither Butler nor any other of Carson's critics on these matters are quite up to the shaming task for the following reason.

A person like Dr. Carson, whose spiritual foundation is in Christ--rather than in his skin color, his tribe, or in Leftist Patronage--cannot be shamed in this manner, nor, likely, in any other. As my friend Steve Graham once said, for Christians, Jesus the Christ is our race, creed and color. We fly another Flag and find protecting under another Wing.

And, for all the mud which has been slung in Carson's direction, he has not apologized nor backed off of any of his assertions. The truth needs no apology.

(Thanks to Breitbart and Twitchy)

Thank you, family and friends, for helping me save my earthly inheritance! You are the best!

Post a Comment