Turn the Other Cheek? The Left Tried That – And Got Their Teeth Kicked In

U.S. Agents Take Undocumented Immigrants Into Custody Near Tex-Mex Border

Much has been made over the last few days about the treatment of some of Orange Foolius’ top henchmen/women. Last week, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen (whose name is SO “’Merican”) was harassed out of a Washington Mexican restaurant. Allegedly the next day, policy advisor and poster boy for the neo-Nazis Stephen Miller was taunted (he probably took it as a compliment) with cries of “fascist” at another Mexican eating establishment. Then on Friday in Tampa, another SCROTUS Succubus, Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, was harangued out of a screening of a biographical film on PBS’ Mr. Rogers, blonde hair flowing in the breeze as she sprinted to a car and received a police escort because she was “so harassed.”

But it was the treatment of Head Liar and Apologist Sarah Huckster Suckabee that seems to have drawn the most attention. Over the last weekend, Huckster was supposedly waiting to nosh on a tasty cheese plate – you know, while the children ripped from their parents’ arms were sitting perhaps THOUSANDS OF MILES from wherever their parents were – when the owner of the establishment quietly asked her party to leave. According to reports, the wait staff did not feel comfortable serving her – hey, why would some members of the LGBTQ community want to serve an unadulterated liar and bigot on issues that concern them? – and the owner QUIETLY asked Huckster to leave. While she and her party did leave without issue, she then went and whined about it OVER AN OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT (a violation of law) to get her Orange Points for the week.

The discussion regarding this issue has brought out some real doozies from the conservative factions. Huckster Suckabee started off her Daily Press Briefing on Monday – the first held in a WEEK, mind you, because you can’t explain the logic in ripping families apart when the entire WORLD including Pope Francis, the Methodists, Jewish rabbis, Muslim imams and atheists are against you – by issuing a whimpering Nancy Kerrigan-esque bullshit soliloquy. “We are allowed to disagree, but we should be able to do so freely and without fear of harm. And this goes for all people, regardless of politics.” She then launched into some verbal diarrhea about how the SCROTUS had done so much, earning her Orange Points for THIS week so that she can miss out on her turn in the barrel.

This has been continuous from those on the right for the last few days. Florida Senator Marco Rubio – who actually COMPARED THE SIZE OF HIS DICK TO ORANGE FOOLIUS’ during the 2016 Republican Campaign (what, you don’t remember the “hand size” comment?) – put this beauty out over Twitter:

Now remember, this is the same man who was called “Lil’ Marco” by this scam artist that he now dons knee pads and Chap-Stick for. Who said, “I’d like to punch him in the face.” Who said, “Go ahead and knock the shit out of him, I’ll pay your court costs.” Who had followers in Charlottesville ACTUALLY KILL a woman because they believed in him.

There have also been other SCROTUS sycophants who have echoed those same sentiments, however. And conservatives sounding off on this issue would be fine if it weren’t for one thing:  that ship has already sailed because YOU DID NOTHING ABOUT YOUR SIDE IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Nobody – and yes, let me emphasize that…NOBODY – did a fucking thing about it when Orange Foolius basically wrapped his dick in the flag and screwed Lady Liberty with it. Nobody sounded off when he attacked John McCain or Gold Star families, nobody on the right said anything when he savaged allies abroad, NOBODY SAID SHIT when he attacked other businesses because they DARED to displease him. Now YOU want a side to “be kind,” “be nice,” “turn the other cheek.” You know what that got us last time…KICKED IN THE TEETH.

MichelleObama

We all remember back when Michelle Obama stood up on the stage at the 2016 Democratic National Convention and, amid the sanctimonious slathering coming from the rabid dog that became SCROTUS, said “When they go low, we go high! (and after eight years of the bullshit she put up with from right-wingers, that was bold)” And, for the most part, most of the Democratic Party and liberals did adopt that mantra (unless it was simply something so utterly outrageous that it could not be accepted – WHAT THE CONSERVATIVES SHOULD HAVE DONE). Shouldn’t that work BOTH ways, however?

For decades, abortion clinics have been bombed and attacked, with women looking to utilize the services of Planned Parenthood harassed by hordes of religious whackos holding fake fetuses at them. For decades (if not centuries) minorities have been treated like a second-class citizen IF they were lucky. For decades gay couples lacked the rights to even make the critical “life or death” decisions because THEY WEREN’T ACCEPTED as a “married” unit. For decades the Roman Catholic Church has DENIED their “religion” to those who had premarital sex, a divorce or other “abomination” that THEY DETERMINED wasn’t “right.” Then there were these wonderful people:

 TrumpSupporters2

So now because some right-wing wench who read all the studies of Goebbels and is putting his lessons to work can’t have a cheese platter in a restaurant the left is supposed to kowtow? Sorry, no fucking way.

IF you want to broadcast your support for this administration and the SCROTUS, that’s fine. That’s your right. But you also have the right to be shamed for those actions, especially those that supposedly go against the conservative right’s conviction and “morals” (we established long ago, however, that they don’t have any). You have the right to be informed that you are being a villainous bitch (or bastard) and have to put up with perhaps a crowd that doesn’t like you very much for that stance. It’s the price you pay for BROADCASTING YOUR STANCE.

Now I am sure that there will be some that say, “Well, it’s (their) job.” OK, great. You can quit. If you are seeing injustice occur, you don’t stand on the side and enable it. You don’t go along with it and try to “change it from within.” You can walk away and maintain some semblance of morality to the issue. Here’s the rub, though:  if you continue to be an apologist for the situation, make excuses and “whataboutisms” regarding the subject, you no longer are doing a job. You then become party to what is going on and complicit in the act.

The left has held its tone in check for some time, to be honest. Liberals by definition are on the tip of the spear when it comes to social change, sometimes putting themselves literally in the crosshairs of the “establishment” (re: conservatives), or does Martin Luther King, Jr., or Kent State not ring a bell for anyone? That conservatives are now earning the same derision and scorn that once was reserved for those activists who fought against injustice is simply an evening of the playing field.

After almost 18 months of watching this aberration in D. C. act, I would actually applaud the left for holding back as long as it did. Shame is one of the last vestiges that seems to affect how someone behaves (why else would some conservative sheriff’s make someone walk with signs shaming them for criminal acts?). The problem is that conservatives, along with sacrificing any morality that they once had, has tossed on the trash heap their abilities to be shamed into contrition for their actions.

Advertisements

…But “Black Lives Matter” Isn’t Helping the Situation

There is an old adage, “there are two sides to every story.” I personally have always liked the rock band Extreme’s take with their album III Sides to Every Story. III Sides to Every Story was a concept album (an outstanding album that stretched genres in hard rock) regarding different “sides” to a story that was divided into three sections – “Yours,” “Mine” and “The Truth.” That concept is more realistic than many who divide things into two sections because, regardless of who is telling the story, there is some truth in both sides. That middle ground – “The Truth” or the third side – is 99 times out of 100 the way something occurred.

When it comes to the case of police shootings, especially of unarmed civilians, across the United States, there has been the grassroots growth of a “side” to help tell their story. The loosely affiliated group known as Black Lives Matter has sprung up across the country, trying to take the helm of the protests against the overreach of law enforcement in its actions against minorities. While a coalition such as this is necessary to continue to keep the focus on the actions of law enforcement, Black Lives Matter isn’t helping the situation and, in fact, the situation overall may be better off if they didn’t intercede.

Black Lives Matter actually date back further than the turmoil that first arose in 2014 and truly exploded over the course of 2015. The shooting of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman in Florida in 2013 – and his subsequent acquittal in a trial in Florida – brought about the usage of the hashtag “#BlackLivesMatter” on Twitter, long before any incidences from the past couple of years. It is only with the deaths of Michael Brown in Ferguson and Eric Garner in New York that the founders of BLM emerged as a nationwide organization. As of today, there are now 23 chapters of BLM, spread across the U. S., Canada and Ghana.

According to their website, BLM is an organization “intended to build connections between Black (sic) people and our allies to fight anti-Black racism, to spark dialogue among Black people and to facilitate the types of connections necessary to encourage social action and engagement.” What you won’t find on this webpage is the one thing that is critical for any organization to have to be successful in their endeavors – leadership on a national level. Without this leadership, the message of BLM can sometimes get lost and, in some cases, the tactics used by those in the organization’s name can be a detriment to the overall cause of the group.

We only have to look back to 2011 to see what happens when a movement initially has a good purpose but gets derailed by the lack of recognizable leadership. In September 2011, protesters took to the grounds of Zuccotti Park in New York City’s Wall Street area to protest against the largesse of the “1%.” What came to be called “Occupy Wall Street” intended to bring attention to several facets of life in today’s world – wage inequality, financial corruption, the other reasons behind the financial collapse that brought the Recession of 2008 to life – but gradually devolved into something that was nowhere near what the original intentions of the group had been.

By the time the protesters and their tent city in Zuccotti Park was busted up in November, there were various fringe elements hanging on the “Occupy Wall Street” movement. This occurred because there was no leadership for the group to issue its thoughts, its beliefs, its coherent goals. Instead of actually having an impact, by the time the Zuccotti Park grounds were cleared, there was little that was actually accomplished by the Occupy Wall Street “movement.”

In many ways, BLM is seemingly on the same path that the OWS movement trod before them. BLM initially had a very solid reason for coming together – the killing of unarmed men (in this case black) by law enforcement under suspicious circumstances – but lacked a national coalition to be able to organize its “chapters” and drive this message home first. As a result of the inability to have a focal point to work from, the individual chapters have gone about pushing the message to the people in all the wrong ways.

One of the most obvious methods of protesting was taken from the old marches from Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., in blocking roadways while delivering the message through a walking protest. In some areas, however, BLM supporters weren’t just satisfied with getting their message across through a moving march, they decided to lie in the streets of major cities and block traffic, sometimes for hours on end. This method of protest violates one of the major keys of protesting:  don’t offend those whose opinions you’re trying to sway.

This style of protest became even more prevalent during the holidays this year. In Chicago – where there are seriously some issues with the police department – BLM protesters disrupted holiday shopping on Black Friday along the “Magnificent Mile,” the line of high end shops in the Windy City. It even reached the point that the Mall of America and the Minneapolis Airport (a city also protesting a police shooting) was the site of sometimes violent clashes between BLM and law enforcement.

Once you’ve made the point of your protest, then you can let life return to normal for people who had nothing to do with the situation. If you either continue to push your demonstration (look at the two months of OWS and how public opinion changed there) and exceed a reasonable amount of time, you can turn public opinion against your group and, hence, your cause. What was the reason for denying people the ability to shop? To really make them dislike you? That isn’t a desired end for the protests.

The next one was much more sinister in its message. According to several media outlets, marchers who were offered a booth inside the Minnesota State Fair this summer to advocate for their cause refused said location to instead march directly in the street outside the entrance to the carnival. During this march, the BLM banner was flying while the marchers chanted “Pigs in a blanket, fry ‘em like bacon.” Law enforcement officials viewed this as a death threat against officers (a reasonable assumption), one that was weakly refuted by BLM “leaders” who said they didn’t hear such words being used (the You Tube links are quite numerous).

Finally, there’s been the methods used by the movement to thrust themselves into the 2016 Presidential race. Through virtually storming several campaign stops – on both the Democratic and Republican sides – the BLM movement has tried to make their cause celebre the focal point of what is a very complex election (even to the point of demanding from each party a Presidential debate on racial justice; both parties declined). Not only have the persons involved with the organization disrupted several speeches from Presidential candidates, they have caused several campaign stops to be closed due to their disruptions.

Once again, with a solid national leadership and some organization, this wouldn’t have to happen. With those simple pieces of structure, there wouldn’t be the turn against BLM that there has been. I personally have several issues that are quite important to me in this campaign (on the federal, state and local levels) – the revamping (training, screening and monitoring) of law enforcement can be done on the state or local levels, not on the federal one.

Now you might say, “Well, you don’t understand, you’re white…” and you would be correct. I don’t understand what it is like to constantly be thought of as breaking the law by simply being a certain ethnicity. I don’t understand what it is like to be viewed with suspicion in virtually every aspect of life because of my skin tone. I do understand, however, that things can be changed through solid leaders and national organization…right now, Black Lives Matter doesn’t have that and they should remove themselves from the equation with law enforcement until there is such organization as mentioned previously to this organization that could do a great deal for life in these United States.