Right Reason to Repeal
House Bill 2 should not be repealed because of its negative financial impact on the state. It should be repealed because it is wrong. It should be repealed because it is discriminatory. It should be repealed because it is unjust. It should be repealed because it is the right thing to do.
A student group at the University of Wisconsin-Madison is now demanding free tuition for black students, and only black students. “How racist!” you may say, and you would be right. But it gets better. The neo-fascists at UWM are also demanding that SAT scores no longer be considered in the admissions process, since this is an example of “white supremacy
This is just one example of black privilege. The gratuitous granting of extra points to people with black skin in the university admissions process has become so routine that it is no longer remarked upon. The fact that it is a form of institutionalized racism is never mentioned.
Black privilege also manifests itself in the outrageous MWBE preferences. MWBE stands for minority and women-owned business enterprises. Translation: White men need not apply. How would the “fair-minded” and sanctimonious left react if the positions were reversed, and the message said “black women need not apply”?
Affirmative action is the most entrenched example of black privilege. If you’re not a member of the favored race – black – then you are put at a severe disadvantage in competing for a job, a grant or a college place.
What happened to judging people by the content of their character, not the color of their skin?
What happened to equality under the law? Black privilege happened.
The fact that so many are not just trying, but actually changing history, to suit their own sensibilities is a sad trend. One’s views on how reality has impacted them personally certainly should be discussed. This is how we hopefully keep from making the same mistakes. But this logic should not evolve, as it has, into dictations of how to remember “what’s right” as demanded from the progressive left trying to change what actually happened in our past. Continually altering the who, what, why, when and where of history is a national travesty.
What should stand as a local affront to all, suffered from revisionists with an agenda, is the changing of Greensboro’s Aycock Junior High School’s name (now a middle school). I attended this school, one of Greensboro’s finest and oldest. Former North Carolina Gov. Charles Aycock’s existence and contributions (like most people’s, both good and bad) are being largely erased by renaming the school after someone who means little to those having matriculated through it now for over 95 years.
But now, somehow, a number of proverbial radicals we commonly suffer have prevailed in erasing both the heritage of those attending Aycock school and its namesake, simply because of a few who seem not to accept the reality of reality. Add UNCG’s Aycock Auditorium to the list of historical censures by a few progressives in our city – and what’s next? Should this misguidance continue, the unimaginable that our next generations may never have heard of Robert Byrd, Strom Thurmond, Lester Maddox, etc. – and, look out, Thomas Jefferson – just might be the new reality. If we erase history, its value as a template for our future is forever lost.
This national practice of altering what in fact “is” (please excuse the Clinton clause) is insanity. If you too think so, please say something about it.
In your Feb. 23, 2017 Under the Hammer column, you wrote: “What the mainstream media should be doing is creating some diversity of thought in their newsrooms.”
From a career in journalism I can assure you that “diversity” in the newsroom means hiring people with darker skins and different genitals but the same political attitude.
Nose in the Tent
An article in The Wall Street Journal by Melanie Grayce West and Zusha Elinson dated Feb. 23, 2017 has me worried.
“Passengers arriving on a Delta flight from San Francisco to John F. Kennedy International Airport on Wednesday night were asked by U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials to produce identification as they exited the plane.”
They were looking for an individual that an immigration judge had issued a detention order for, yet they demanded to see a government ID from everyone exiting the plane. One would think they would at least have a general description of their target, but that didn’t seem to matter.
I am a firm believer that all illegal immigrants and those that have overstayed their visas should be rounded up and deported. They have broken American law and like anyone else who does so should be punished. Not enforcing the law is equal to dear leader’s “line in the sand” action (or lack thereof) in Syria. But this particular act is, in my opinion, way outside the law. This feeds into the anti-Trump forces’ “he’s a wannabe dictator” theme. Whoever ordered this needs to be, at minimum, fired immediately and brought up on charges of violations of civil rights.
My question is, what would have happened if one of those passengers refused to “show his papers”? Would they have been arrested? If so, on what charge? I can guarantee had I been on that flight I would have been the one to refuse.
Some would say, if you have nothing to hide why not cooperate? That is not the point. I have the right to go about my business unmolested unless there is probable cause to detain me. If I had resembled the person in question that’s different. If I was seen coming out of a location where a crime just occurred, they are allowed to determine if I may have been involved. But what was done in this case is way beyond reason.
I’ve always made it known I do not trust the government, and, yes, I am a government official myself. When you let the camel’s nose in the tent, the rest is going to follow eventually. Don’t think so? Look at what’s going on around you. If you take their (actually ours, taken by force) money, you have to dance to their tune.
Go Galt and save the republic.
Send to firstname.lastname@example.org or P.O. Box 9023, Greensboro 27429