Every time a police shooting involving a black suspect goes viral in the mainstream media, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have showed the opposite of leadership: They have both lent support to the racist Black Lives Matter movement which has made street harassment of whites a part of their routine behavior, and they without exception join the media in dredging up historical grievance narratives and casting blacks as pervasive victims of both police violence and disparities in policing… Because of the color of the suspect’s skin in a given story as opposed to actually bothering to wait for the investigation to be completed, for the officers involved to have their say, and for investigators to release their findings to see if the invoked racial grievance narrative actually even fits the given case at hand.
This is political opportunism at least if not dog whistle politics at worst, and it is a case of gross malfeasance by the media who keep authoring news items dredging up race simply due to the black male/police demographic rather than assembling a fact-based argument to validate why they are bringing up race which means the media are doing nothing but race baiting.
On the New York Times webpage the morning after the Dallas Police ambushes, we see such headlines as, “What White America Fails to See” by racist Michael Eric Dyson, “Michael Brown’s Mom on Dead Black Sons,” a spectacular NY Times ediTARDial titled, “When Will the Killing of Black Men Stop?” And nestled in the coverage on the Dallas ambushes, an article titled, “New Details Emerge in Shooting of Black Man During Traffic Stop.” A large sub-headline under the main story about the Dallas ambushes reads, “Here’s What We know About the Shootings in Dallas, Baton Rouge, and Minnesota” – clearly tying them together in a narrative based on one common thread: race.
Mass mainstream media as a whole have created and continue to propagate this story line that whenever a select police shooting of a black male goes viral (at their decision to make it so), they rather than wait for evidence to emerge, engage in speculation about race and cops and Jim Crow and dredge up the bottom of the historical barrel and lay that at the feet of police everywhere. Hillary Clinton happily goes along to appease her racist black voting base, and here we are: Yet more people inflamed by political rhetoric and media grandstanding become homicidal and start going after random police officers. Media then publish opinion pieces and have guests who lend credence to the theme of the day, legitimizing it, and ultimately of course not only blaming cops in general but (white) society as a whole, bashing everyone for the deeds of the long-dead and assuming these cases of the living are an outgrowth of that without any proof whatsoever except a generally common skin tone.
Obama’s Twitter page is silent. Thankfully it does not seem to contain the type of congratulatory rhetoric Hillary is offering Black Li(v)es Matter, however it’s… Silent. It has nothing about the police, not so much as offering condolences or anything else.
Obama is pandering and trying to play both sides of the fence rather than showing any leadership independent of attempting to satiate racist black mobs. He has repeatedly after high-profile shootings slammed law enforcement and railed about “disparities” in policing rather than showing any kind of leadership in encouraging people to be calm and wait for adequate information to emerge to validate accusations of racist policing in these cases. He has failed to condemn the media’s dredging up racial narratives and has failed to condemn black leadership for assuming it’s racial when the only “proof” is a superficial glance at skin tone of the parties involved. As such, Barack Hussein Obama is directly causing and contributing to the hostile racial atmosphere that builds up around police shootings and is not only one of the people pouring fuel on the fire but indeed, as the President of the United States, is one of those holding a match. And so is Hillary Rodham Clinton.
And after all that, they offer a half-assed condemnation of the Dallas ambushes.
This is nothing new; it has occurred in every recent election cycle. Trayvon Martin in 2012, Michael Brown in 2014, and now we have several men in 2016. Not only do Democrats do this with race at election time, but also gender; frightening women over their birth control and abortions. A Colorado Democrat did it so much he was coined Mark “Uterus” Udall. Maybe we should coin Hillary “Cop Killer” Clinton?
We didn’t have a problem with people ambushing cops out of the blue like this until after the political and media elite began using police as pawns and political piñatas.
Similar happened with whites in general after race baiting TV coverage after the Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown killings. We had a number of “This is for Trayvon!” racist attacks against random white people.
The media are irresponsible, unprofessional, and unethical at the minimum, assuming they aren’t an agenda-driven part of the New Left which authors these Critical Race Theory narratives to begin with which the media just happens to frequently publish and thus give legitimacy to, such as the NY Times with CRT believers Michael Eric Dyson and Kimberle Crenshaw.
The sole deceased suspect in Dallas at this point, Micah Xavier Johnson, spoke of the origin of his animus by supporting Black Li(v)es Matter and expressing hostility toward white people and police which were his obvious motives in the sniper attack. Without the political rhetoric and blanket race baiting media coverage, this likely wouldn’t have happened.