Monday, August 26, 2013


              Like others among the dwindling portion of Americans who are offended by the offensive, I have long since learned to avoid watching much TV at all, let alone the abominable and redundant carnivals of vanity and vulgarity that are laughably portrayed as entertainment awards shows. 

                Merely refusing to watch these insufferable programs, however, does not shield one from exposure to news and publicity reporting their poisonous content, featured on nearly every variety of news outlet, including the websites which are my primary source of daily news.

                That was the case this Monday morning, when virtually every news source I visited included reports and pictures of what, for want of a better euphemism, can only be described as the obscene on-stage contortions of two of the most renowned female performers of the era:  the entity widely known as Lady Gaga (it is absurd to grant her the vaingloriously self-assumed honorific without a qualifier) and former adolescent TV star Miley Cyrus.  Their squalid escapades were the headline acts of the annual cultural atrocity known as the Video Music Awards, or VMA.

                Although I have abstained from viewing the widely available videos of these "performances," the reports describing them are quite sufficient to confirm that Ms. Cyrus in particular ventured across new frontiers of obscenity and offensiveness.  Not to be outdone by the outlandish Gaga's predictably pornographic shock-tactics, Cyrus descended to depths of explicit sexual depravity and exhibitionism that left even a few prominent media liberals (like MSNBC's Mika Brezinski) gasping in revulsion. 

                                    Karen Carpenter:  Antidote to the Vulgar VMA Culture

                But most mainstream outlets found it merely amusing, or even cute, that Cyrus had repeatedly engaged in a particularly lurid and explicit form of sexual simulation referred to as "twerking."  My deliberately limited experience of contemporary youth culture has spared me knowledge of exactly what that awkward and ugly term means, nor do I wish to know.  But one particularly feckless and smirking CNN TV commentator gleefully explained that this nasty maneuver was now all the rage with the younger generation; and then, with the utter illogic and incoherence that is the earmark of liberal media commentators, reassured us that, in that case, Ms. Cyrus' obscene simulations were okay after all.  In other words, "the kids are alright" -- no matter how obscene their behavior.  Chuckle, chuckle, wink, wink. 

              Other media sources reflexively mocked social conservatives for their allegedly puritanical intolerance in objecting to a young woman being "able to perform as she chooses."  Their "defense" of the VMA show's extreme forms of pornographic exhibitionism, promoted to appeal to both teens and pre-teens, is simply the circular and conclusory argument – what lawyers call "ipse dixit" -- that there is nothing wrong with the unfettered broadcast of extreme obscenity because millions approve of it,; and that conservatives are therefore unenlightened puritans to object.  Take that.

                Cyrus, many will recall, originally came to fame starring as "Hannah Montana" in the brainless, but relatively innocuous, Disney TV series targeted largely at teenage and sub-teenage girls.  She no doubt retains a large following among these very young girls.  And many of their parents were undoubtedly idiotic enough to allow them to watch the VMA's grotesque carnival sideshow of creepy and lurid sexual simulation.

                So this is  the depth to which we have descended:  millions of American families gathering around their television sets to watch Hannah Montana engage in simulated sexual contortions with her smirking and strutting backup dancers and with prancing teddy bears.  It's a long way from "Good-night, Jim-Bob," to put it far too mildly.

                Lurid and depressing stories like this tend to reinforce a growing conviction that our culture is poisoned and polluted beyond the cleansing capacities of disinfectant and decontamination chambers -- leading SR to throw up his hands and pose the rhetorical question, "Where is Karen Carpenter when we need her?"

                But then one stops and realizes that Ms. Carpenter, and other refreshing oases of cleansing and uplifting beauty like Astrud Gilberto and Dionne Warwick, are merely a Youtube click away.

                After wandering into the depravities of VMA, Gaga, and the degenerate remains of Hannah Montana, what one needs is a cleansing, musical Karen-bath to restore one's faith in the prospect that there is genuine innocent beauty still lingering somewhere out there.

                A good place to begin is by enjoying the Carpenters' charming performance of their hit recording "Sing" at their sold-out concert before an enthralled Japanese audience at Tokyo's Budokan in 1974.  Karen Carpenter's gentle and protective inter-action with the choir of very young Japanese schoolgirls who were invited to sing back-up, including her rendition of several of the song's lines in fluent Japanese, nicely illustrates the class, decency, and sweetness of this remarkable vocalist and pioneering lady drummer (Ms. Carpenter appears a bit disheveled in the video because, only minutes before, she had just concluded an all-out, "head-banging" drum-riff as part of the group's rendition of "Johnny-be-Good"; she is not called the Drummer Girl for nothing.). 

                For another refreshing escape from the sordid and lurid anti-music of the VMA exhibitionists, it would be difficult to improve on Karen's moving live rendition of the Carpenters' classically beautiful Gold Record, "For All We Know" – which rescued that song from the obscurity of a forgettable scene in the movie "Lovers and Other Strangers" to the celebrity of an Academy Award for best song, and became a wedding song classic for the ages.  The video of Karen's performance of the song at the "Live at the BBC" concert in London in 1971 faithfully records not only the unmatched depth and beauty of her flawless contralto, but the ladylike grace and modesty of this remarkable and lovely superstar.  At a time when she was the most successful female pop vocalist in the world, Karen never resorted to any form of self-indulgent exhibitionism or vanity, but simply let her magnificent voice, surrounded by her brother's exquisite arrangements and a superb group of backup musicians, do artistic justice to great music.

                A final illustration of the uplifting qualities reflected in Miss Carpenters' musical performances can be found in the Carpenters' classical ode to innocence, "Bless the Beasts and the Children."  This was the emotive soundtrack theme song of the somewhat edgy animal rights and adolescent right-of-passage movie of the same name.  The song was nominated for an Academy Award in 1972.  It is hard to envisage any other vocalist who could credibly bring off this anthem with the sincerity and innocence which it required, and which Karen so naturally and movingly conveyed.  The song also provided the backdrop for a series of public service television ads urging responsible treatment of pets which the Carpenters performed for the Humane Society.  Fast forward 40 years to find Miley Cyrus using teddy bears -- once the innocent toys of childhood -- as porn props for her creepy VMA burlesque, and we can grasp the pertinence and foresight of Karen's exhortation concerning the adult world's responsibility towards children and animals:  "Light their way when the darkness surrounds them."  In today's wretched media culture, regrettably, the darkness is winning that battle in a rout.
                Karen Carpenter was a model of personal and professional modesty even as she recorded and performed some of the greatest pop and romantic music of the 20th century.  Her preserved performances, a perfect antidote to the VMA smut of Gaga and Cyrus, provide a refreshing and cleansing retreat from the cultural sewage that too much surrounds us in the early years of the 21st.



Wednesday, August 21, 2013


       As I recently demonstrated on this blog, see "Media Suppression of Racial Realities in Crime Reporting,", America's mainstream TV, internet, and print media have steadfastly suppressed facts, information, and stories that would reveal the infuriating extent of black-on-white violent crime in this country today.  Those who do seek to expose and spread the truth on this issue commonly refer to the media's perverse dishonesty in inter-racial crime reporting as the product of a "double standard" -- i.e., an enthusiastic readiness to report and dramatize the relatively rare instances of white-on-black crime (e.g., the Zimmerman-Martin episode) in contrast with a systematic and institutionalized refusal to reveal the race of blacks who commit violent crimes against white victims, even in the most egregious cases.

         It is beginning to appear, however, that blandly describing this widespread form of media malpractice as a mere "double standard" is far too generous an understatement, serving as something of a convenient euphemism.  The especially perfidious reporting of the most recent of many black-on-white criminal outrages this summer -- the bullet-in-back murder of a young white Australian man in Oklahoma by two black thugs (assisted by a third thug of indistinct, but apparently mostly caucasan, lineage) -- is moving SR to the view that a more genuine description of the media's role in the misreporting of inter-racial crime is one of craven complicity

        In deliberately and systematically concealing and minimizing the widespread occurrence of violent black-on-white crime, the media effectively condones and facilitates it.

        Although one could point to many similar examples, the Associated Press (AP) report of the murderous outrage in Duncan, Oklahoma, was particularly dishonest and shamelessly misleading.  It's opening line states as follows (see Washington Post, Aug. 21, 2012, at p.3, and

               With the simplest of motives -- breaking up the boredom of an Oklahoma summer --
        three teenagers followed an Australian collegiate baseball player who was attending school
        in the United States and killed him with a shot to the back for "the fun of it," prosecutors
        said Tuesday as they charged two of the teens with murder.

      The insidiously deceptive and vapid phrases used to characterize these atrocities -- allegedly bored generic "teenagers" acting on "the simplest of motives" -- served to distract the reader's attention from any suspicion that some kind of inter-racial hate crime may have been afoot.  One would search in vain through every line of the AP/Post report for any indication of the murderers' race.  And the Post's presentation of the story included only a photo of one of the impromptu memorials for the victim, while omitting the mug-shot photos of the hardened faces of the perpetrators that were included in reports on conservative websites. 

                             The Media's "Bored Teenagers" Theory of Summer Murders 

       Anyone depending upon the AP/Post report for information on the Oklahoma atrocity would have been left clueless as to certain highly significant characteristics and motives of the perps that more vigilant and professional news outlets quickly discovered and reported.  While AP and the Post so glibly, falsely, and sneeringly reported that these murders were attributable to the need to escape "the boredom of an Oklahoma summer," vigilant internet truth-seekers unfettered by liberal establishment blinders honed in like lasers upon the darker and more insidious realities at work.

       The ever vigilant Pajamas Media, see Bryan Preston's article at, and other internet reporters, see "Investigation: Chris Lane Death Result of Gangster, Gang Culture," at, lost little time in finding and scrutinizing the Facebook and other social media pages of James Edwards and Chancey Luna, the two arrested perpetrators charged with Murder One.  These materials demonstrate that Edwards and Luna were heavily involved in the so-called "gangsta" rap culture, including possible links to the notorious Crips crime gang.  Pictures of Edwards and Luna arrogantly flashing gang signs were also displayed on the media pages.  It has also been reported that Edwards had expressed hatred for white people on his Twitter account.

         In short, what the mainstream media sought to disguise as a random, inexplicable killing committed by a faceless and generic group of bored and aimless "teenagers" was actually a patently obvious inter-racial hate crime perpetrated by a pair of black delinquent thugs who were openly and proudly associated with the so-called "gangsta" culture and possibly with the notorious Crips African-American crime gang, or a variant thereof. 

        This murder was not "random" and is attributable to something far darker than boredom.  It was instead an act of calculated inter-racial malice perpetrated by barbarians whose own public declarations and displays conclusively reveal their embrace of a violent black-gangster culture.  Any contention that there was no racial element in this atrocity is demolished when one recognizes the absurdity of insisting that these thugs would just as likely have selected a fellow black bystander for random execution.

         The mainstream media's continuing and systemic dishonesty in misrepresenting or ignoring outrageous inter-racial crimes like the recent atrocities in Oklahoma, Brunswick, Georgia (the point-blank murder of an infant in his stroller), and Gulfport, Florida (the infuriating 3-on-1 school-bus beating) does more than conceal the magnitude of black-on-white crime from the public.  It continues to feed the insidious fallacy -- fanned by the Obama administration as well as by the media -- that violent black delinquents are victims rather than criminals.  In doing so, the media obscurantists have moved beyond a mere double standard into the pernicious realm of complicity.


       August 23.  Hardly had the ink dried on reports of the Oklahoma atrocity when another infuriating inter-racial attack occurred and was again either ignored or misreported by various mainstream media cites.  Delbert Belton, a white 89-year-old Army veteran of World War II who had been wounded at the bloody Battle of Okinawa, was beaten to death in a Spokane, Washington, parking lot by two black thugs whose pictures were captured, presumably by a security camera.  The odious perpetrators had not been apprehended or identified as of this post. 

      As usual, the stalwart Drudge Report immediately reported the outrage, including the entirely relevant reporting of the fugitive thugs' race.  Fox News filed a similarly prompt and complete report, but the persistently deceptive CNN's report of the incident reiterated the stock liberal media canard that these obviously racial hate crimes are merely random, shamelessly stating, "It was the second time in a week that a seemingly random attack by teenagers has claimed a life."  It is becoming increasingly apparent that in the liberal media's style book, the term "random" has become a synonym for "black-on-white" or "inter-racial."  Another revealing point:  How does CNN know that the unapprehended, unidentified perpetrators in the Spokane murder were in fact "teenagers"?  They don't, but what does it matter to a news outlet where sloppiness and negligence are at least an improvement on deliberate falsehood. 

      Significantly, as of this morning, both the Washington Post and the LA Times sights had simply ignored this hellacious but totally newsworthy story, with the Post reporting instead on the far more important topic of "NFL bag policy," and the LA Times considering a follow-up story on developments of the prior slaying of a transgender person in Florida more significant than genuine "hot news" on the shocking Spokane murder of an aged WWII hero.

      But the prize for the most fraudulent, deceptive, and unprofessional reporting today goes to the website.  Needless to day, failed to report the Spokane outrage, but it was still dedicating space to concealing the now obvious racial facts in the Oklahoma murder.  Days after multiple outlets had published facts demonstrating that the Oklahoma perpetrators were associated with the black "gangsta" culture, that at least one of them had spewed anti-white venom in his social media outlet, and that two of the killers may have had connections with the Crips crime gang, the CBS site was still perpetuating the fraudulent narrative of a "random" killing by bored teenagers.  Incredibly, CBS ran a gallery of seven pictures related to the slaying, but not one of them portrayed the killers themselves.  And when finally got around to running a story on one of the perpetrator's (Edwards) hate-filled social media postings, it perversely suppressed any mention of the fact that he was black.  A more glaring example of perversely deceptive and misleading reporting of a major national (indeed, international) inter-racial crime story would be difficult to conceive.

Monday, August 19, 2013


               There was a time when the U.S. military's monolithic and enthusiastic response to presidential directives was an admirable and reassuring trait – such as its prompt and agile mobilization for all-out war after the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941.  Now, instead, the military leadership's headlong rush to fall enthusiastically in step with immoral and tyrannical policies such as the Obama administration's campaign to impose a radical pro-homosexual agenda on the entire nation should be cause for deep concern.

                Only recently, for example, the Pentagon has made special provisions to enable homosexual service members who decide to "marry" each other to travel cross-country to states that permit same sex marriage.  Seven to ten days of preferential and unchargeable leave will be granted to these same-sex military couples so they can circumvent the laws that limit marriage to one man and one woman in the state in which they are stationed or their state of residence.  This cross-country marriage leave will be fully paid, of course, as well as unchargeable, so unsuspecting citizens will be glad to know that they are now subsidizing same-sex military marriages with their taxes.  The Pentagon's policy on special leave arrangements for homosexual military honeymoons was not made clear.

                But this is hardly the only area in which homosexual troops are receiving special and preferred treatment, while their heterosexual comrades-in-arms are admonished to button their lips and salute the Rainbow Flag.  Although military personnel are generally prohibited from wearing their uniforms in off-duty parades or demonstrations, in 2012 the Defense Department specially authorized homosexual troops to wear their uniforms in a so-called Gay Pride parade in San Diego.  The Pentagon's utterly incoherent and circular justification for the preferential approval was that the organizers had "encouraged" gay troops to wear their uniforms and that the parade had received national attention.  Then the special permission was repeated for the same Gay Pride parade in 2013.  One can only imagine the sputtering response of Obama's politically correct generals and admirals if sponsors of the annual Right to Life March "encouraged" pro-life service members to wear their uniforms at the next March and requested a similar exemption.

Marine Legend Chesty Puller would not be amused by the Corps' LGBT Outreach                

                Elsewhere, U.S. Air Force officials recently defended a vulgar public performance by a bevy of drag queens at a so-called "Diversity Day" celebration officially sponsored at a Los Angeles Air Force Base.  An Air Force spokeswoman, aggressively defending this grotesque burlesque in language that would have done credit to Barney Frank himself, actually stated, "Drag acts to this day represent the struggle for freedom and equality of the LGBT community, while at the same time providing a deep-rooted form of historical entertainment for the LGBT culture."  The Air Force did not address the suitability of such "historical entertainment" for the young dependent children who would be exposed to it as they innocently strolled the base with their unsuspecting military parents. In a conflict between the unfettered expression of "LGBT culture" and the innocence of dependent military children we now know that the U.S. Air Force stands squarely with the drag queens.

                But the Air Force is not alone in its suddenly discovered enthusiasm for the LGBT agenda.  Two years ago, no sooner had the military's long-standing prohibition of homosexual acts been revoked than none other than the U.S. Marine Corps rushed headlong to outdo the other services in targeted recruitment of homosexuals.  Crew-cut Marine recruiters quickly deployed to gay community centers in an effort to take the lead in enticing homosexuals to enlist in their service.  See "Marines Hit the Ground Running in Seeking Recruits at Gay Center," NY Times (Sept. 11, 2011), at  Astonished Marine veterans everywhere can only ask, "Where is Chesty Puller when we need him?"  We can only be sure that, like Queen Victoria, he is "not amused."

                Far from amusing, the military leadership's unquestioning and gung ho embrace of the administration's pro-homosexual agenda is distinctly ominous.  As shown by the above examples, it goes well beyond merely minimal obedience to the letter of presidential directives and statutory requirements, and reflects a bizarre and unseemly enthusiasm for some of the most extreme tenets of LGBT orthodoxy.  It indicates that military leadership is willing to turn cartwheels and somersaults to curry favor with their political masters, at the expense of the vast majority of the troops in their command. 

                At the slightest tug of the strings by their presidential puppeteer, the military authorities instantly reversed long-held positions and policies respecting the dangers of homosexuality in the barracks to enthusiastically assume the role of pro-LGBT authoritarians and advocates -- ready, willing, and able to suppress and punish the views of brave soldiers and Marines whose moral and religious principles conflict with this profound and sudden reversal of a fundamental tenet of the military and moral code.

                One then can but wonder:  What other longstanding principles and standards of this Nation would today's sycophantic general staff be so enthusiastically and instantaneously prepared to abandon some day at the behest of a Caligulan president?     
                Before the time-honored military policy against homosexual activity in the military was repealed, then Marine Commandant James Amos had forcefully testified and spoken out against repeal, stressing that the distractions caused by homosexual incursion into the force may  even endanger the lives of Marines in combat.  But as soon as the traditional policy was reversed by the politicians in Washington, General Amos instantly suppressed his presumably genuine fear that the spread of openly homosexual Marines throughout the force would introduce a disruptive element that could endanger the lives of the Marine under his command.  Not content merely to suppress his misgivings about the safety of his troops, the compliant Commandant went so far as to declare that the Corps would now "step out smartly to faithfully implement" the new pro-homosexual directive. 

                 There was a time when a senior officer might have honorably resigned his commission rather than embrace a policy that he believed would endanger or deeply demoralize his troops, unless that policy were necessary for the defense of the Nation or other essential strategic objectives.  Needless to say, the accommodation of a pro-homosexual political agenda meets neither of those objectives.  Yet, far from either resigning or even continuing to offer principled dissent against the new policy, the Commandant insisted that the Corps must "step out smartly" and enthusiastically advance it.

                President Obama and his administration have repeatedly demonstrated their disregard for the restrictions of the Constitution and laws of the Nation in furthering their political objectives.  They have done so, to cite just a few examples, by categorically declining to enforce the immigration laws to deport illegal aliens, unilaterally dropping the requirement to seek work as a precondition to welfare, and selectively deciding which provisions of the health care reform law to enforce.

                Is it only a matter of time before this law-defying administration employs an unquestioningly subservient general staff to jettison other longstanding principles and standards in furtherance of its extreme political and social agenda?  At present, it is only members of the military itself whose constitutional and religious rights – such as the right to assert and obey one's religious beliefs on matters of sexual morality -- are being trampled by military commanders to force conformity to the regime's pro-LGBTpolicies.  Yet in an era when the invocation of even a chimerical terrorist threat can be used to justify the functional equivalent of martial law – witness the lockdown of Boston to enable militarized police to pursue a solitary teenage fugitive, see "Lockdown over Liberty in Boston," at – peremptory deployment of the Armed Forces in unprecedented contexts and for unprecedented purposes does not seem as farfetched as it seemed only a decade ago.

                After all, it was only recently that a Department of Homeland Security report conflated those opposed to abortion and Big Government, as well as other conservative categories, with potential terrorists.  We might be only one crisis and one presidential terrorist designation away from a situation where a compliant general staff orders the troops to "step out smartly" to suppress ideologically disfavored groups of Americans.

Thursday, August 8, 2013


               As noted in my prior posts and elsewhere, the major television, internet, and print media outlets deliberately manipulated the facts of the George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin case to create and cultivate the inflammatory and false narrative of an outrageous white-on-black crime.  The Obama administration and the Holder Justice Department seized on this opportunistic mythology and ran with it to appease their most-favored minority constituency.  Notwithstanding Zimmerman's acquittal by an honest jury, Holder's minions at DOJ continue to cultivate and pursue the possibility of a federal civil rights lawsuit against Zimmerman, although it is evident to informed legal observers that adequate grounds for such a suit are lacking and that even Holder will have to reluctantly acknowledge that in the end.
                But a more recent and deeply infuriating inter-racial crime, and the major media's blatantly dishonest response to it, underscores in harsh relief the profoundly disturbing corruption of both the media and the Obama administration with respect to the inter-racial aspects of violent crime.

                Back on July 9, three 15-year-old black delinquents participated in a brutal beating of a smaller 13-year-old white boy on a school bus in Gulfport, Florida.  The story only surfaced nationally because it was recorded on video and, in the parlance of the day, the video "went viral" on YouTube.  The video reveals a sickeningly sadistic assault by a group of criminal bullies who have since been charged by authorities with aggravated assault (one has also been charged with robbery of the victim). 
               The bus driver in question, who was a 64-year-old black man, did not intervene physically to stop the assault, although he did tell the assailants to stop and placed a call to dispatchers urgently calling for help.  The youthful victim somehow managed to leave the bus, with a broken arm and black eyes, apparently before the authorities arrived.  The assailants were later arrested and charged, but apparently have been released pending trial or plea.  They should be charged as adults and prosecuted for felonious assault, but one suspects they will be tried as juveniles and escape the lengthy imprisonment they deserve.

                                          Mainstream Media contemplates Black-on-White Crime
                Appallingly, but not surprisingly, major media outlets reporting this outrageous criminal assault suppressed its inter-racial character.  It should first be noted that the crime would not likely have been reported at all but for the widespread circulation of the sickening video on the internet.  But even when television media outlets picked up the video, they apparently doctored it to conceal the fact that the victim was white.  As reported in the Bayou Buzz,

                                But one reason the case has not become as racially charged as other attacks
                may be that many news outlets have either not shown the first few seconds, before
                the victim goes down behind a seat, and others blur out his face to the point that his
                race is no longer apparent.

                Apparent video doctoring was not the only evidence of media manipulation to suppress the exposure of another black-on-white crime that underscores the absurdity of the false "We are Trayvon" narrative of the purported national threat to young black males.  A quick spot-check of media reports identified by an internet search shows that both national and local media reports of the incident deliberately suppressed its manifest inter-racial character.

                A CNN report, at, slyly focused attention on the issue of the bus driver's responsibility, neatly diverting attention from the real issue of a violent inter-racial beating of a young boy on a school bus in apparent retaliation for reporting a drug-pusher.  CNN not only failed to report that the victim was white, but even suppressed the race of the black perpetrators (made obvious on the video).  Both the Tampa Tribune and the Orlando Sentinel also suppressed the racial component of the crime in their stories.  The Sentinel's journalistic dereliction was even more outrageous.  Its headline of the story read "Teens beat classmate over a marijuana dispute [emphasis added]."   Not only does this headline deftly divert attention from the inter-racial bullying aspect of the beating, but it insidiously implies that the victim may have brought the beating upon himself by some kind of involvement in drug dealing.  Thus, in their perverse commitment to the distortion of racial reality, the media portray a brutal inter-racial assault as a "marijuana dispute."

                 The most infuriating aspect of such deliberately deceptive and truth-suppressing reporting on racial matters in the mainstream media is that it is part of a consistent pattern rather than an isolated episode.  That pattern is so well-documented as to require no further elaboration here.  See, e.g., "Newark Star Ledger admits to censoring race in savage mob attacks," (May9, 2012), at  Conversely, of course, the liberal mainstream media is only too glad to report, or even to invent, an inter-racial component when the victims are black or other minorities, as evidenced by the Zimmerman-Martin affair.

                As shown in prior posts, this racially-biased approach in the media's reporting of crime and other policy issues reinforces, and seeks to validate, the Obama administration's similarly biased policies and practices on racial matters.  The Obama-Holder Justice Department has made it clear that it has no interest in investigating, let alone prosecuting, outrageous black-on-white episodes of inter-racial crime such as the Gulfport incident and many others like it.  Yet a single episode of self-defense killing of a black teenager by a so-called "White Hispanic" is deceptively portrayed as evidence of rampant anti-black crime by Obama, Holder, and their media minions, and is relentlessly pursued and exploited by a politically corrupted Justice Department.

                Despite all this, Republican "leaders" in Congress, Statehouses, and elsewhere seem loathe to raise, let alone pursue, an issue that demands strong prominent voices to counter the false racial narrative pedaled by the Obama administration, the Holder Justice Department, and their subservient mouthpieces in the media.  This reluctance appears to be attributable in large part to an irrational and unwarranted concern that opposing anti-white bias in law enforcement and other areas of public policy will offend the sensibilities of constituencies that would never vote for Republicans or conservatives in any event.  Those leaders should be more concerned about the constituencies who do vote for them, many of whom have had enough of the increasingly insidious racial double standard in law enforcement, public policy, and media reporting.