Tag: Trayvon Martin

The Left never ever lets go of a narrative

Truth? The left has no use for truth, they have propaganda

In short this “film” perpetuates a narrative, not facts. Martin attacked Zimmerman and according to eyewitnesses, and physical evidence was savagely beating Zimmerman when he was shot. He was not a victim, but, again, the left cares not one bit about truth

Fake News? The Left revels in it!

Bob Owens catches Teen Vogue in a massive misrepresentation about the death of Trayvon Martin

People are entitled to share their own opinions, but it’s grossly irresponsible and unethical for a “professional” publication (especially a magazine aimed at children) to blatantly lie to their readers. Sadly, that is precisely what Teen Vogue has done as they have attempted to turn Trayvon Martin into a martyr.

Almost five years ago, 17-year-old Trayvon Martin was shot and killed by a “neighborhood watch” member as he walked home from a convenience store where he had purchased a juice drink and a package of Skittles. George Zimmerman, the man who shot Trayvon, believed him to be “possibly dangerous” because of his race and the fact that he was wearing a hoodie.

Trayvon’s murder – and Zimmerman’s eventual acquittal – incited nation-wide outrage and was part of launching the powerful Black Lives Matter movement. To this day, Trayvon’s name serves as a reminder of the progress that is necessary in order to improve the very real problem of police brutality and racism.

Today (February 5) would have been Trayvon’s 22nd birthday. All across social media, people are pausing to pay homage to Trayvon’s memory, while reminding the world that his life was taken prematurely and unfairly.

The article’s author, De Elizabeth, doesn’t just play fast and loose with her opinion, but objectively lies about the circumstances surrounding Martin’s February 26, 2012 death.

I highlighted the most gratuitous lies, such as Zimmern targeted Martin because of his race, and that Martin was murdered. And that his death somehow had something to do with  police brutality. Martin attacked Zimmerman, and Zimmerman, fearing for his life defended himself. If Martin’s life was taken “unfairly” it was no one’s fault but Martin’s

I am thinking that, other than the names, Elizabeth got everything wrong in her screed. And, given that anyone can find the truth about the shooting, it was self-defense, to the evidence, to the trial, I must conclude that Elizabeth lied deliberately. But, again what does the left think of truth? Absolutely nothing. Owens has more at the link

Your Insolent Prick of the Day

Via Moonbattery who exposes this wimpy, bottom feeding, race baiter bill-dorland

One reason the epidemic of black-on-white violence has been getting out of control is that the leftists who control the information establishment have exploited George Zimmerman’s act of justifiable homicide to whip up a false sense of injustice. Months after it was settled, agitprop provocateurs are still milking it, pushing their cultural Marxist propaganda to ever more inflammatory extremes of hyperbole:

An email sent to students by a University of Maryland official that cites the Trayvon Martin shooting as evidence “it is legal to hunt down and kill American children in Florida” is being blasted as the latest evidence of a left-wing bias on campus.

The email, from William Dorland, director of the school’s Honors College, starts by welcoming students back to campus, but then quickly veers into politics.

“This year, we learned that it is legal to hunt down and kill American children in Florida,” it reads, in a reference to the trial of George Zimmerman, who was cleared of all charges in the fatal shooting of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. The email went out to all students in the Honors College.

This statement was part of an effort to promote an appearance at Maryland by the despicable Julian Bond, who Dave Blount rightfully labels a race arsonist.

I have said before that the rash of Black on White violence will, eventually lead to an instance where the intended target has a concealed carry permit. And, when that target refuses to be a victim, and defends themselves watch the Left go into hyper attack mode against the NRA, stand your ground, self-defense, concealed carry permit holders, etc.

 

Liberals celebrate idiocy, hail noted moron Brian Beutler

Stacy McCain sums up salon writer Beutler, and his column of lies to perfection

Brian Beutler is hailed by his fellow liberals as a genius — a man of brilliant insight — for exactly one reason: He is a liberal.

And he expects us lowly mortals to be impressed.

Here is more from The Other McCain I am giving you almost the entire fisking McCain does on Bong Boy Beutler because, well it is dead on, funny, and well worth your read.

The right’s black crime obsession

Conservative media’s total fixation on black-on-black
and black-on-white crime isn’t going to end. Here’s why

(We may derive the intent from the headline: “The right” is conflated with “Conservative media,” because everyone who votes Republican does so because Bill O’Reilly and Rush Limbaugh have told them to. This is therefore the umpteenth journalistic reiteration of the Media Matters daily mantra about the illegitimacy of conservative media.)

BY BRIAN BEUTLER

(Prepare for deliberate dishonesty.)

There are a few black people up to no good in this country and Fox News is on it! So is Drudge Report. Vigilantly on the lookout, 24 hours a day, for stories about black youths behaving badly.

(Didn’t I warn you? Beutler starts lying right off the bat, assuming a liberal readership who never actually watch Fox News and who are too lazy even to bother checking the Drudge Report.)

This isn’t a particularly new phenomenon, but it’s intensified noticeably in the past year for at least two reasons. Conservatives, particularly white conservatives, feel a burning urgency to find a racial counterweight to the aftermath of Trayvon Martin’s shooting (including President Obama’s public comments about the incident), a logical response to the argument that things like background checks and an assault weapons ban are appropriate ways to reduce the likelihood of another Sandy Hook-style massacre, and anecdotal justifications for indiscriminate policing of dangerous neighborhoods.

(This has “intensified noticeably in the past year,” which means since August 2012. Is it true that “white conservatives” actually do feel the “burning urgency” Beutler attributes to them? Or is this just another tendentious assertion he pulled out of his ass? Certainly I feel no such urgency, but maybe someone else does.)

But these are hopeless pursuits. The incidents they draw attention to fail by definition to underscore the things they believe. They all require projecting motives or details or both into tragic events, to create false dichotomies between shootings perpetrated by whites and blacks. They have the unhealthy effect of creating dueling tallies of white-on-black and black-on-white crime. And ironically they all tend to underscore the argument that more “stand your ground” laws and more racial profiling are off-point responses to these incidents.

(Do you see how this is going to go? Brian Beutler asserts that conservatives hold certain beliefs, and then asserts that facts don’t support those beliefs. And notice Brian Beutler says conservatives are “projecting motives,” which Brian Beutler never does!)

The latest conservative cri de coeur is over the tragic shooting death of Chris Lane, a 22-year-old Australian attending East Central University in Oklahoma on a baseball scholarship. Two teen boys spotted Lane on a jog last week, trailed him in a car, and allegedly shot him fatally in the back (a third teen reportedly served as their driver). One of the suspects said the boys committed the murder out of boredom.

(This is merely the “latest” such incident — i.e., in which conservatives are alleged to have done what Brian Beutler says they do — but what was the one before Chris Lane? I don’t remember it, but maybe Brian Beutler could, if he chose, rattle off a long list of incidents like this which, so he says, “conservative media” have hyped for the reasons that he says they’re hyping such incidents. He doesn’t actually provide a list, however, so readers are supposed to take Brian Beutler’s word that this is actually a phenomenon.)

Word of the shooting spread quickly. And that’s when the right clumsily revealed that its obsession with gun violence reflects an obsession with racial score settling rather than with averting further tragedies. The conservative media, including Fox News, repeated the claim that the Oklahoma suspects were all black. But this turned out to be a toxic mix of racial bias and wishful thinking. You almost wonder whether the people whose ulterior motives led them into error like this actually lamented the fact that one of the suspects happened to be white. It would be so much more convenient if that weren’t the case.

(When did Fox News, or anyone else, do what Brian Beutler says they did, claiming that the “suspects were all black”? I mean, maybe they did — I haven’t paid any attention to this story — although I don’t see Beutler linking to a source, or quoting anyone. But once again, Beutler assumes a liberal readership that never watches Fox News, so he could say anything about the network’s programming and his ignorant readers would have no choice but to accept his assertions.)

But let’s pretend for a minute that the suspects had all fit the stereotype the hosts at Fox and Friends wanted. Then the idea is that Chris Lane’s death should somehow offset Trayvon Martin’s, or that the people who sought to turn George Zimmerman’s actions into a national referendum on “stand your ground” laws are somehow hypocritical for having little to say when the races of the culprits and innocent victims are reversed. For reactionary Obama foes like former Rep. Allen West, R-Fla., the obvious question is, “Whom will POTUS identify w/this time?”

(The link to the Tweet by Allen West is THE ONLY LINK IN THIS ENTIRE COLUMN. Isn’t Salon.com, y’know, one of those Internet kind of things, where political bloggers routinely link to their sources, so as not to give the appearance that they’re just pulling stuff out of their ass or, as some call it, “doing a Beutler”?)

I’ll give West, et al., this: If you ignore motive, circumstance, history and (likely ) outcome, then liberals, particularly black liberals, sure seem craven. By that standard, though, Jean Valjean and John, King of England are moral equals — just a couple of guy s with similar names taking other people’s property.

(Does that paragraph mean anything? Anything at all?)

So let’s review: George Zimmerman wouldn’t have shot Trayvon Martin if he hadn’t been profiling by race. And even if he had been, the shooting feasibly wouldn’t have happened if he hadn’t been legally allowed to carry a handgun and didn’t think he was empowered by law to take matters into his own hands. The monstrous killing of Chris Lane has no such back story. The killers apparently had no motive whatsoever, were armed illegally, and certainly weren’t trailing Lane because they believed, based on his race, that he might be a criminal. They are, however, likely to face serious prison time for their crimes. Zimmerman walked.

(And here, evidently too stoned to realize it, Beutler actually proves a point — a conservative point — about crime: People get shot to death all the time, for all kinds of reasons, or for no reason at all, and no policy advocated by liberals is going to prevent this from happening. Zimmerman shooting Trayvon? You can call that “racial profiling” or you can call it a tragic misunderstanding, but exactly how do you propose to prevent it from happening? “Zimmerman walked” because he had a claim of self-defense sufficiently plausible to constitute “reasonable doubt.” Also, notice that, while admitting that the teenagers in the Chris Lane shooting were illegally armed, Brian Beutler assumes that if Zimmerman “hadn’t been legally allowed to carry a handgun,” Zimmerman would not have also illegally armed himself. Why assume that? And what about Trayvon’s “whoop-ass” beating of Zimmerman, which Zimmerman said he thought might end in his own death? Would Brian Beutler have been happy to have Trayvon beat Zimmerman to death?)

Put that all together, and it turns out these stories aren’t counter-parallel at all. And more to the point, the events don’t even anecdotally augur for policies the right supports. The kids in Oklahoma weren’t “standing their ground,” and a “stand your ground” law wouldn’t have saved Chris Lane. Neither would a stop-and-frisk regime — the killers were trailing him in a car. By contrast, a “stand your ground” environment and a stop-and-frisk mentality were instrumental in Trayvon Martin’s death. Take either away , and there’s a good chance he’d be alive today. Martin in fact personified the statistical folly of stop-and-frisk. If Zimmerman had yielded to real police, they would have, in absence of any suspicious behavior, stopped Martin, frisked him and found only the skittles and iced tea that made his death that much more tragically poignant.

(Again, it is only Brian Beutler’s assertion that the Chris Lane murder is being reported because “conservative media” believe the story supports a policy argument. My own guess is that after the incessant 24/7 media drumbeat about the Zimmerman trial, which liberals claimed was an event fraught with political significance, some “conservative media” basically decided, “Hey, we’re going to stop downplaying or ignoring black-on-white crime, just to make a point.” But that’s merely my guess. Unlike Brian Beutler, I don’t possess any clairvoyant mind-reading powers that enable me to know why Fox News producers or Matt Drudge do what they do.)

You could twist that into a claim that stop-and-frisk might have saved Martin’s life. But that gets the onus backward. Proponents of profiling policies need to do better than argue we have to violate the civil rights of minorities in order to protect them from hair-triggered vigilantes.

(The “stop-and-frisk” thing is strictly an issue in New York, because of an NYPD policy that was declared unconstitutional by a federal judge. It has nothing to do with Oklahoma and even less to do with Sanford, Florida. Why Brian Beutler keeps bringing it up, I don’t know. Has the “stop-and-frisk” issue has been discussed by anyone at Fox News in the context of the Chris Lane murder? If it has, then why doesn’t he quote that discussion? In general, why are there no links or quotes in this column? Why can’t Brian Beutler be bothered to provide actual evidence of the phenomenon he presumes to critique? Why do liberals think it’s acceptable to assert controversial claims that they don’t bother to prove? How many bong-hits does Brian Beutler usually do before writing his columns? Seven. That’s  now an established fact — because I just asserted it, see?)

What might well have stopped both killings, though, is making it harder for people, legally or illegally, to come into possession of handguns. That’s a conversation the right is less obsessed with.

(Again with the assertion: People who Brian Beutler doesn’t like are “obsessed,” or they “ feel a burning urgency,” or have an “obsession with gun violence” and “an obsession with racial score settling,” or are motivated by “racial bias and wishful thinking.” Over and over again — pausing only to take another bong hit — Beutler attributes irrational motives to antagonists for doing what he asserts they are doing, although he merely asserts this without providing any actual evidence of it. There are no quotes from Fox News broadcasts in Brian Beutler’s column, no links to transcripts. It’s just a straight-up rant that was written only because Brian Beutler is supposed to write a certain number of columns per week for Salon and, because he never does any reporting or, for that matter, much of anything that could be called “research,” he just sat down, toked up a few bowls of sinsemilla and let it rip, right off the top of his head.)

Brian Beutler is Salon’s political writer. Email him at bbeutler@salon.com and follow him on Twitter at @brianbeutler.

(Or you could also block him on Twitter. Or say rude things about him on Twitter. Certainly there’s no reason to follow him, unless you want him to hook you up with some weed.)

Copyright © 2011 Salon.com. All rights reserved.

Fuck you. Fair use. Sue me, you bastards, I double-dog dare you.

Hence forth, any time I reference Beutler, AKA Bong Boy, and I am sure I will because he writes such incredibly bad pieces ( so bad they make David Brook’s screeds look good) that I will feel compelled to take him to the proverbial woodshed at some future point. As an added bonus, here is Brian Beutler preparing to do a Salon piece

Bong Boy1

Can you believe we once thought Colin Powell was a Conservtive?

He has turned out to be nothing more than a Democrat, and he seems to have a touch of Racial Obsession Syndrome going too. Right Scoop has video, that will not embed here of Powell calling the Zimmerman verdict “questionable”. Good grief!

 

MLK III is a disgrace to his fathers name

What a sorry excuse for a human being

Via CBS News:

Tens of thousands of people gathered on the National Mall Saturday to commemorate the 50th anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s 1963 March on Washington, listening as political and civil rights leaders reflected on the legacy of racial progress over the last half-century and urged Americans to press forward in pursuit of King’s dream of equality. […]

Martin Luther King III paid tribute to his father’s legacy. “Five decades ago my father stood upon this hallowed spot” and “crystallized like never before the painful pilgrimage and aching aspirations of African-Americans yearning to breathe free.”

King’s message was not a “lament” or a “diatribe,” his son said, but a call to action – and a reminder that the work always goes on.

“The task is not done, the journey is not complete,” he said. “The vision preached by my father a half-century ago was that his four little children would no longer live in a nation where they would judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

“However, sadly, the tears of Trayvon Martin’s mother and father remind us that, far too frequently, the color of one’s skin remains a license to profile, to arrest and to even murder with no regard for the content of one’s character,” he said, calling for “stand your ground” self-defense laws to be repealed in states where they have been enacted.

Nothing but a race pimping Leftist hack trying to destroy this great nation, and the basic human right of self-defense. If he gave one damn about Black victims of violence, he would address Black on Black crime, which counts for the vast majority of Black killings. But he is all about $$$$$$$$

The dumbest thing I have ever read

Brian Beutler, writing lying profusely at Salon  illustrates how the left works. NO matter what the facts are, they ignore them if they do not match their agenda

You can read the whole thing, in which Beutler LIES not only about the Zimmerman case, but also about Conservatives and Black crime rates. Beutler claims that a “few Blacks are causing problems” when in fact young Black men commit 14 TIMES as many murders as young White men do. He also ignores the high violent crime rate among Black youths, and that the most common victims are also Black. But the most obvious lies are about the Zimmerman trial

So let’s review: George Zimmerman wouldn’t have shot Trayvon Martin if he hadn’t been profiling by race. And even if he had been, the shooting feasibly wouldn’t have happened if he hadn’t been legally allowed to carry a handgun and didn’t think he was empowered by law to take matters into his own hands. The monstrous killing of Chris Lane has no such back story. The killers apparently had no motive whatsoever, were armed illegally, and certainly weren’t trailing Lane because they believed, based on his race, that he might be a criminal. They are, however, likely to face serious prison time for their crimes. Zimmerman walked.

Profiling? There is no evidence of that, except in the warped mind of fools like Beutler of course. And there is also NO evidence, did Beutler actually watch the Zimmerman trial, that Zimmerman took the law into his own hands. He defended himself, and no, again, Stand Your Ground was not his defense, but Beutler is loathe to ever admit that. Can’t let facts stand in the way of the agenda can you Beutler?

Put that all together, and it turns out these stories aren’t counter-parallel at all. And more to the point, the events don’t even anecdotally augur for policies the right supports. The kids in Oklahoma weren’t “standing their ground,” and a “stand your ground” law wouldn’t have saved Chris Lane. Neither would a stop-and-frisk regime — the killers were trailing him in a car. By contrast, a “stand your ground” environment and a stop-and-frisk mentality were instrumental in Trayvon Martin’s death. Take either away, and there’s a good chance he’d be alive today. Martin in fact personified the statistical folly of stop-and-frisk. If Zimmerman had yielded to real police, they would have, in absence of any suspicious behavior, stopped Martin, frisked him and found only the skittles and iced tea that made his death that much more tragically poignant.

How Stop and Frisk, of which I am not a fan of either, had a damn thing to do with Trayvon Martin is beyond me. Zimmerman did not stop him, or attempt to frisk him. AGAIN, the evidence in the trial clearly pointed to Martin attacking Zimmerman and Zimmerman, fearing for his life, acting legally by defending himself. By the way, if Beutler ever did any research he would find that stand your ground laws, and concealed carry laws REDUCE violent crime rates, but, those are facts so Beutler has no interest in them. Stand your ground laws were not applicable in the Zimmerman case, yet Beutler continues to insist they did somehow. He is too busy trying to make some point. Maybe he might pause in his crusade for gun control for just a moment and ask himself one question. Why does he have to LIE to try to prove he is right?

H/T to That Mr. G Guy and The Other McCain, who also takes the foul stench of truthlessness to the ideological woodshed

Generally speaking, every word published by Salon is the exact opposite of truth, and they only employ writers so fanatically dishonest that even such infamous organs of mendacity as the New York Times and theWashington Post want nothing to do with them.

Anyone published by Salon is a wretched human stain, and they’re never going to get a link from me, but Brian Beutler’s deliberate dishonesty got him a Memeorandum thread yesterday

In short, Salon is like MSNBS, which is to say, a cesspool of Leftist lies and distortions. Beutler is just another turd floating around in said cesspool.

Also check out Donald Douglas’s tweet to Mr, Hanky

.@BrianBeutler This the lamest, most logically contorted piece I’ve read. The right’s black crime obsession http://www.salon.com/2013/08/23/the_rights_obsession_with_black_crime/ … #RACISM

BAM!