Then there’s the story of the white woman who tried to “pass” for black. Was it to get a job with the NAACP, which she apparently has or had? Here’s a white woman with two biological white parents who has been pretending for years that she’s black.
Of course, we’ve been told that to suggest that there might be an advantage nowadays to being black is racist. Light skinned blacks have been “passing” for a long time. Phillip Roth even wrote a book about such a man who was based on a real writer, whose name I can’t recall right now.
The truth is that there are substantial advantages to being black. College admissions and other preferences are one obvious perk. They may be in the service of “diversity”, but they are still an advantage. Or as George Will recently noted, some people enjoy being putative victims, which is assumed to be a part of the black identity.
Would white criminals be ever considered victims of police brutality and the cause of mass demonstrations and disruption the way blacks have been in the wake of Ferguson, Baltimore and the rest?
If this woman wanted to be a real victim, she might have tried to pass for Asian. Then she would’ve run into quotas used against her for school admissions and other opportunities. A recent law suit against Harvard for discriminating against Asians is illustrative of anti-Asian bias. The problem, it seems, is that there are just too many academically talented Asians who would completely dominate the elite educational system if scholastic talent were the only admissions requirement. Again, it’s diversity – not racism; all for a good cause. Forget about the Asian student who is passed over in favor of a “minority” whose test scores are over a hundred points lower than the Asian.
Then again, maybe this woman just likes and admires black people and wants to be one of them. As Jerry Seinfeld once noted: Is it racist to like another’s race?
Hillary is a woman. That seems to be the only reason she’s basically unopposed for the Democratic presidential nomination. Yes, she has “name recognition” which nowadays is of utmost importance. Who out there knows Bernie Sanders or the former governor of Maryland? Quickly, what’s his name and could you pick him out a lineup? Ok, he’s Martin O’Malley and apparently he once had the dubious distinction of also being mayor of Baltimore, which has come to symbolize all that’s wrong with American inner cities.
So we know Hillary, but what makes her a shoe-in for president? Do I really need to list her non-accomplishments and her truck load of dubious baggage?
OK, just off the top of my head: non-existent “re-set” with Russia. In fact the reset emboldened Russia to go on a rampage in Ukraine and Crimea. She ignored security concerns in Libya and then tried to blame Benghazi on a video. And who can forget the immortal words: “At this point what difference does it make?” if a couple of guys get a yen to go kill Americans. I mean, who cares if they were merely offended TV watchers or Al Qaeda? Well, apparently an awful lot of folks don’t see what difference it makes given the lead Hillary has.
And then there’s the Clinton Foundation money pot. It’s amazing that she and her husband haven’t been indicted.
But the Democrats want their “First Woman President” just like they got their First African American President? Me? I’m ready for a second Harry Truman or Ronald Reagan or an American Margaret Thatcher. If it has to be a first woman, someone like The Iron Lady would fit the bill quite nicely.
I haven’t written for a while. Politics is so repetitive and, frankly, boring. nowadays. There’s Obama who seems to be immune from any scandal. Overall, the media backs him,no matter how incompetent and petulant he is. Scandals come and go despite this or that senator or congressman pledging to “get to the bottom” of every outrage: Benghazi, the IRS, Fast and Furious. The list is endless and no one gets to the bottom of anything and no one is held accountable.
Hillary ought to be considered a joke, but she seems to be on her way back to the White House (with Bill) despite the sleaze she and her husband are mired in.
Except for isolationist Rand Paul, the Republican candidates seem vastly superior to Hillary, but we can count on the media to denigrate them mercilessly. So Jeb Bush misunderstood the question about Iraq: Would he have gone into Iraq knowing then what he knows now? Big deal. Marco Rubio, Rick Perry, Lindsay Graham all seem sensible and knowledgeable and are at least relatively forthcoming about what they really think, unlike Hillary.
The fact is that the weapons of mass destruction argument was only a small part of the rationale for getting rid of Saddam Hussein. He was in violation of more than a dozen binding UN resolutions, and after 9/11, the West, led by America, had to make a stand against Middle East outlaws. The U.S. put up with one Arab/Islamic outrage after another from Arafat’s assassination of the U.S. ambassador to the Sudan to the Achille Laurel, to the blowing up of the Marine barracks in Lebanon and more, culminating in the 9/11 attack.
We should have gone to war against Iran when they took our embassy hostages back in 1979. We should never have allowed the religious fanatics to take over a large important country like Iran. But the fact that they got away with their storming of the embassy and holding of our hostages only encouraged more of this nuttiness, and led directly to 9/11 and the current ISIS obscenity
Ron James - Harmless Aggression 