Cheap Seats Online 2015 Part B
Lives Matter - 09/02/15
By Rich Trzupek:
Here we are, a seemingly civilized nation – which we pretty much are, if one ignores that whole selling dead baby parts and then get all “you’re just crazy extremists” if somebody points out that in fact happens – and, in Democratic crazy-world anyway, one is vilified if one dares to say “all lives matter”.
Former Maryland governor and Democrat presidential hopeful got positively crucified for using those three words, rather than marching in lockstep with liberal messaging and using the acceptable “black lives matter”. He did go to liberal confession later however, denouncing and apologizing for his hateful words, and presumably all is now forgiven in lib-town.
For crying out loud, when somebody says “all lives matter” they are, by default, also saying that “black lives matter”, because I’m pretty sure that “black lives” are a subset of “all lives”. Granted, I’m not a geneticist, but I think I’m on safe ground here.
Oh, I get it. I understand the twisted, tortured logic that demands Dems shout “black lives matter!” as their modern-day version of “sieg heil!” whenever racial issues some up.
(Save your ink. I’m not calling Dems Nazi’s. I’m calling them mindless automatons and using a very readily understandable allusion to another group of mindless automatons engaged in group-think to illustrate the concept).
The twisted, tortured logic starts with the necessary assumption that, if all of white America are not bigots who don’t give a rip about black lives, a significant portion of them are and, of that significant portion, a disturbing part of them are in positions of authority, most notably (and dangerously) in law enforcement. Ergo, while “white lives matter” is a given to such creatures, “black lives matter” is not, ergo we must rhetorically carve out the black population when we talk about lives that matter as a way of pointing out that much of white America does not currently feel that way about black lives.
There’s so much wrong in that tortured, twisted logic, that it’s kind of hard to decide where to begin. But let start here: every year police kill something over 400 individuals in the course of their duties. In the vast majority of these cases, the killings were deemed to be justified, usually because the officer’s life, or that of an innocent person was in danger.
In contrast, let’s look at the FBI’s 2013 homicide statistics (the latest year the Bureau has released a report on the issue:
Whites (non-Hispanic; 64 percent of the population) committed 3,005 homicides; the victims were white in 2,509 cases, and black in 409 cases.
Blacks (non-Hispanic; 13 percent of the population) committed 2,491 homicides; the victims were white in 189 cases, and black in 2,245 cases.
Hispanics (16 percent of the population) committed 588 homicides; the victims were white or Hispanic in 486 cases, and black in 87 cases.
Clearly, blacks violently ending the lives of another black is far, far greater problem than the distant possibility that a rogue cop will kill a fellow human being because said cop didn’t like the color of that fellow human being’s skin.
Even if you believe there was police malfeasance in all three cases that attracted national attention over the last year (Brown, Gardner and Gray) – and in the case of Brown and Gray I would strongly argue that the cops did nothing wrong – but even if you say the protestors were right it each case, that’s three bodies, stacked up against over 2,000.
Clearly the “Black Lives Matter” movement has a subtitle: “When the Loss of Those Lives Fit into Our Preferred Racial Paradigm”. If that weren’t the case, the libs behind “Black Lives Matter” would be working their asses off to change conditions in the nations ghettos, where the children of fatherless families turn to gangs and drugs to give meaning to their lives and, far too often, to violence as a means of affirming their role in this dangerous sub-culture.