Tuesday, July 26, 2016


              Splashing Rocks strives to set the record straight on many of the insidious falsehoods propagated by the Democratic left, particularly in those areas (such as race discrimination law and racial criminal justice issues) where we have particular expertise.  But in an age when the Obama Administration's tireless propaganda machine spreads monstrous falsehoods with brain-numbing regularity, and when the Democrat-controlled media unquestioningly broadcasts those falsehoods with lockstep uniformity, it is all but impossible for the defenders of truth keep up with the relentless repetition of falsehood.

                 But a particularly egregious lie uttered by Obama in his disgraceful speech at the memorial for the recently murdered Dallas police officers was so glaringly and provably false as to demand exposure and denunciation.  As always, moreover, the Big Media's abject subjugation to Obama's politics and policies foreclosed any possibility that this easily refutable falsehood would be identified, let alone corrected.  So Splashing Rocks will do both.

              Earlier, we accurately predicted that Obama would exploit the murder of the Dallas officers by defending the cause of the very afro-racists (like the Black Lives Matter street mobs) who nurtured the climate of anti-police/anti-white animosity that fueled those murders.   True to malicious form, Obama effectively spat in the face of the bereaved Dallas Police community by shifting the focus of the memorial from the fallen officers to his fraudulent theory that blacks are constantly victimized by discriminatory law enforcement.  When he should have confined himself to consoling and encouraging the deeply aggrieved police community and the citizens of Dallas, Obama instead engaged in more of the afro-racist agitprop that has been the sorry hallmark of his tenure.  His shameful speech included this polemic:

                "And so when African-Americans from all walks of life, from different communities across the country, voice a growing despair over what they perceive to be unequal treatment, when study after study shows that whites and people of color experience the criminal justice system differently. So that if you’re black, you’re more likely to be pulled over or searched or arrested; more likely to get longer sentences; more likely to get the death penalty for the same crime. When mothers and fathers raised their kids right, and have the talk about how to respond if stopped by a police officer — yes, sir; no, sir — but still fear that something terrible may happen when their child walks out the door; still fear that kids being stupid and not quite doing things right might end in tragedy. [emphasis added]"

                 This is nothing more nor less than a litany of inflammatory falsehood.

                 As has been repeatedly demonstrated before, the mantra that blacks are "pulled over or searched or arrested" with greater likelihood than whites is a grossly misleading canard.  The comparative frequency of such episodes is only meaningful in the context of the behavior and probabilities giving rise to them.  Blacks commit a vastly greater number of crimes per capita than whites.  So it is only logical and legitimate that they are stopped, searched, and arrested with greater frequency.  What Obama falsely portrays as anti-black discrimination is merely the logical consequence of law enforcement following the facts and the evidence.  The police simply take their perpetrators as they find them.

                 But the most glaringly false of Obama's poisonous remarks was his assertion that "if you're black, you're . . . more likely to get the death penalty for the same crime."  He has reiterated this same incendiary falsehood in speech after speech.

                 As confirmed by FBI and Justice Department data, blacks have consistently committed just over 50% of U.S. murders over roughly the past 30 years (52.5% during the period 1980-2008).  Yet blacks constitute only 13% of the U.S. population.  Blacks thus commit about four times as many murders as their share of the population would suggest.

                 Yet, as shown year-in, year-out by government statistics reported here and elsewhere, blacks receive the death penalty in far smaller proportions than their dominant share of murders committed would indicate.

                 Since 1977, about 34% of U.S. executions were carried out on black murderers, even though blacks commit over 50% of U.S. murders (it should be noted here that murders are the only crimes for which the death penalty is imposed in the U.S. under governing constitutional standards).  In sharp contrast, about 57% of U.S. executions were performed on white murderers, although only 45% of murders were committed by whites.

                 In other words, almost two times as many white murderers are executed than black murderers, even though blacks commit far more murders.

                 Remarkably, the most recent data confirm that the disparity in executions reflecting greater leniency for blacks has become even more extreme in 2016 – at the very time when Obama is deceptively claiming the opposite.  So far in 2016, eleven white murderers have been executed compared to only two blacks!

                 It is now even more clear than ever that what Obama claimed in his disgraceful Dallas harangue was the opposite of the truth.  The hard statistics now confirm that "if you're white, you're more likely to get the death penalty for the same crime [i.e., murder]."

                 Something strange indeed,is going on in the overall imposition of the death penalty, but it appears to be something like the opposite of what Obama would have gullible Americans believe.  Most Americans can't seem to come to grips with the disturbing fact that their president constantly deceives them on this and other sensitive issues.  The most likely explanation for the apparent tendency to enforce the death penalty more readily against whites than blacks is the almost obsessive compulsion of many white jurors, prosecutors, and judges to go to extreme lengths of overcompensation to avoid any claim that they discriminate against blacks.  What one might describe as a peculiar form of the notorious "Ferguson Effect" in the death penalty forum. 

                Whatever the explanation, at least one thing is clear:  Obama lies into the very teeth of the truth when he asserts that blacks are discriminated against in imposition of the death penalty, not to mention many other areas of criminal law enforcement.

Tuesday, July 12, 2016


                In the wake of the appalling Dallas massacre of five white policemen by a black terrorist, more heretofore lethargic Americans are realizing that the festering threat of anti-police and anti-white violence can no longer be ignored.

                A notable indicator of this emergent resolve is the rapid response to a citizens' petition calling on the White House to designate the obnoxious Black Lives Matter movement as a terrorist organization.  The petition was submitted to the White House by someone identified as Y.S. on July 6 – one day before a monster named Micah Johnson perpetrated his anti-white police assault in Dallas.  The assault occurred in the context of a Black Lives Matter (BLM) anti-police demonstration, and Johnson invoked the cause of BLM in his exchange with the police before he was taken out.

                Y.S.'s petition was rather inartfully worded, and it is probably more accurate to describe BLM as a hate group rather than a "terrorist organization" within the meaning of the governing statutes and laws.  Further, few signers of the petition (SR was an early signer) actually expected President Obama – who is firmly on the side of the BLM movement and their virulent campaign – to respond to it with anything more than a curt rejection.  But unrealistic presidential action is not the genuine objective of most who sign the petition.  Rather, it is to make an unequivocal public condemnation of the malicious anti-police objectives and the outrageous civic disturbances (such as illegally blocking major highway arteries) of the BLM movement and its supporters.

                When SR signed the petition, there were only about 10,000 signers on board.  Remarkably, however, the number of signers expanded with startling speed – motivated, no doubt, by their fury at the Dallas atrocity and still other anti-police and anti-white violence and disruption that soon followed.

                Only five days after its initiation, and only four days after Dallas, the petition had exceeded the goal of 100,000 signers required to force a formal White House response under the rules governing the petition process.  At this writing, the petition is approaching 120,000 signers, although the numbers can now be expected to tail-off since the main goal has been reached.

                Although the petition's success is only a tentative indicator that people are finally coming to grips with the reality of the violent anti-white temper of the BLM movement and its mobs, the nature and requirements of the petition process show that this episode has more significance than may first seem apparent.  Unlike the typical on-line poll or survey, one could not support the petition under the safe cloak of anonynmity.  Rather, signers are required to submit their name, home address, and e-mail address – to the White House office that administers the petition process!  Signers are advised that "President Obama and the White House may send e-mails about this and other issues."

                Consequently, the 120,000 odd citizens who have signed the petition were willing to make a very public declaration of their condemnation of the BLM movement – and thus expose themselves to being classified as racists or worse by a White House that has openly declared its support for BLM and its goals.  In short, those signing the petition were truly standing up to be counted on an issue that most of their fellow citizens would rather ignore.  The BLM petition therefore may represent an early sign that the sleeping giant of justifiable citizen resentment against anti-white and anti-police agitation by BLM and similar afro-racist elements is finally awakening.

               Addendum:  Once again proving Putin's amazing audacity and keen understanding of America's political and moral decadence, Russia has announced its plans to put Black Lives Matter on Russia's "Unified List" of organizations that have been "recognized as terrorist groups by Russian Law."  In other words, Putin promptly and vigorously recognizes the destructive and dangerous nature of the racist BLM organization that Obama continues to embrace and encourage in its racist, anti-law enforcement program.  The Russian report underlying the proposed action also points out that tens of millions of dollars age being contributed to this "racial hatred group" by billionaire supporters of Obama.

Monday, July 11, 2016


              The deeply dishonest  and divisive President Obama is scheduled to speak this Tuesday at a memorial for the five murdered Dallas Policemen.  This is a grotesque insult to the fallen officers and their law enforcement comrades nationwide, but is typical of the twisted presumption that the nation somehow requires the guidance of a discredited president whenever a major tragedy attracts widespread media attention. 

                The Nation should turn its back on what will certainly be a fraudulent political speech.  After mouthing the standard bromides and formalities necessitated by such an occasion, Obama can be expected to draw a false equivalence between the genuine tragedy of race-based anti-police violence and the insidious fiction that there is widespread law enforcement discrimination against blacks. 

              The Dallas police should give Obama the same treatment the NYPD officers gave the hypocrite NYC Mayor de Blasio when he had the audacity to show up at the funeral of a policeman who was killed in the very climate of anti-police/anti-white hatred that de Blasio and his ilk have incited.  The NYC officers turned their backs on de Blasio, and the Dallas officers should do the same to Obama.

                Those who share responsibility for the Dallas officers' murders should not be allowed anywhere near their memorial service, let alone be invited to speak as chief eulogist.  Yet the very man whose divisive rhetoric helped establish the atmosphere of anti-police animosity in which attacks on police became inevitable will be allowed to use the officers' service as a platform to reiterate the fallacies that fueled these murders – i.e., the anti-white police gospel of the insidious Black Lives Matters (BLM) movement whose malicious demonstration provided the stage and environment  for Micah "X" Johnson's murder of the white officers.

                There can be no doubt about this:  Obama and his fellow racial agitators in government, politics, media, and the black community do bear grave responsibility for the poisonous climate of anti-police/anti-white malice that they have persistently cultivated.  And it is that sulfurous climate which provided a false sense of legitimacy for the racist anger that motivated Micah Johnson to commit his murderous atrocities.  In case after case, Obama and his political and media allies have instantly pounced on any police action that injures black hoodlums to parrot false and inflammatory claims of discriminatory treatment -- only to be proven horribly wrong when the facts reveal it was the black miscreant (e.g., Michael Brown), not the officer, who was at fault.  But the Black Lives Matter mobs are utterly oblivious to any facts that contradict their anti-police malice, and Obama and his minions have persistently reinforced their defiance of the facts that undermine their implacable hostility.

                SR acknowledges there are those who deny that Obama and his fellow racial agitators bear any responsibility for the Dallas murders.  These apologists lamely invoke the premise that only the actual perpetrator bears full responsibility and that placing any responsibility on others somehow diminishes the killer's guilt. 

                This is a bogus "straw man" argument, asserted in order to absolve those who feed the flames of any responsibility for the conflagration that follows.  No one is denying or diminishing  the perpetrator's individual guilt; rather, they are only making the obvious point that nurturing a pervasive atmosphere of intense anti-police animosity tends to breed anti-police violence.

                An atrocity like the Dallas police murders may have many "but for" causes, even though the actual perpetrator bears direct and primary responsibility, and only he is chargeable with the murder itself.  Obama, Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, Al Sharpton, and countless celebrity leftists have all fomented anti-police and anti-white malice by constantly repeating the gross falsehood that there is a nationwide pattern of discriminatory law enforcement against blacks.  But for the poisonous narrative portraying police as racist dragoons out to persecute innocent black "youths" nurtured by Obama and his leftist minions, it is unlikely that Micah Johnson would have reached the fever pitch of malice against white policemen that possessed him.  And it is unlikely that the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement would have achieved the prominence and power that enabled it to stage massive anti-police demonstrations of the type that provided the stage and setting chosen by Johnson for his murderous assaults.

                There are many reasons to be furious about the Dallas atrocity and other violent disruptions fueled by the BLM movement and its political and media cheerleaders, but the utterly fraudulent  premise and foundation for the entire campaign is the most infuriating aspect of the whole ugly charade.

                Obama, his successive black Attorneys General, and their allies and echo chambers in the media have relentlessly repeated the canard that black anger and resentment against police is perfectly understandable, and even justified, because police engage in consistently discriminatory enforcement of the laws against blacks, especially young black males. 

                The contention is not only false, it is wildly false, and, indeed, the opposite of the truth.  Far from going out of their way to invite predictably contentious or even violent response by confronting truculent black males with unfounded criminal charges, police are understandably reticent to press criminal charges against urban black males except in the most clear-cut and serious circumstances. 

                This is now so well understood that we even have a recognized name for it:  The Ferguson Effect.  Police officers nationwide are keenly aware that any enforcement confrontation with blacks in an inner-city environment poses a grave risk that they will be video-recorded, charged with discriminatory practices, or even physically threatened or attacked by surrounding crowds.

                The most common form of the "discriminatory enforcement" charge is simply to make it as a sweeping generalization that presumably no one would pesume to question – especially in mainstream media discussions, where the leftist moderators and commentators are only too willing to accept as gospel anything and everything asserted by advocates of the blacks-as-victims gospel.  The generalizations are then often followed by invocation of such popular maxims as the bogus "driving while black" slogan, which falsely assumes the premise that black drivers are stopped by police more often because they are black, rather than because they commit more violations; and the equally bogus "racial profiling" canard, which is based on the incoherent and illogical premise that evidence of criminal suspects' race must be disregarded in criminal investigations.  Then the advocates' glibly assert their own alleged (and likely fictional) experiences in being singled out by police in their youth because of their race – a clever technique indeed, because unwitnessed fabrications of long past incidents are  impossible to refute. 

                Fortunately, the FBI and the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) have been maintaining official data on race and crime for many decades.  Extensive, longstanding, and consistent, the data demonstrate that blacks commit a vastly disproportionate share of violent crimes. 

                Thus, the fact that blacks constitute a disproportionate percentage of those arrested and incarcerated for violent crime is plainly not because our police and law enforcement authorities are engaged in racist discrimination.  Given that our highest law enforcement positions at both federal and state levels are heavily occupied by blacks – like our last two Attorney Generals, and the current Secretary of Homeland Security, to name only a few – this would be rather remarkable and counterintuitive.  No, the reason for this disproportion is because blacks commit an extremely high percentage of total violent crimes – a total that far exceeds their percentage of the overall U.S. population.

                Murder is perhaps the best example.  Going back at least three decades, the government data demonstrates that blacks commit about  52% of U.S. murders, year after year (for the period 1980-2008, 52.5% of homicides were committed by blacks, whereas 45.3% were committed by whites).  Yet blacks constitute only 13% of the U.S. population.  This being the case, one would expect that Blacks would constitute about 50% of those sentenced and executed to capital punishment for murder.  But one would be wrong.  In fact, white murderers are both sentenced to death and actually executed  in consistently greater numbers than blacks (for a full analysis of this subject, see my 2014 post, The Capital Canard of Death Penalty Discrimination) .  Since 1976, 55.5% of those executed for murder in the U.S. were white, while only 34.6% were black.  In other words, a white murderer is far more likely to be convicted and executed for murder than a black. 

                So much for Obama's contention that the criminal law is applied to blacks with disproportionate severity.  On the contrary.

                The data on other violent crimes similarly confirms the hard fact that blacks consistently commit violent crimes at a vastly higher rate than whites or other races in America.  The studies and reports vary somewhat in the detail, but the findings are consistent on the basic point.  They show that blacks are roughly eight times more likely to commit robbery than whites; commit violent crimes in general at a rate four to eight times greater than whites; and are 39 times more likely to commit inter-racial crimes against whites than vice versa.  On the local level, disproportionate crime by blacks is sometimes even more striking.  One study showed that for the period January-June, 2008, 83% of gun assaults in New York City were committed by blacks, even though they represented only 24% of the city population.

                Thus, when Obama and his minions glibly repeat the canard that black anti-police animosity is the understandable consequence of discriminatory enforcement against innocent young black youths, know that they are perpetrating a dangerous falsehood of Goebels-like proportions.  Blacks, and young black males in particular, are more likely to experience stops, arrests, and other coercive interactions with police because they commit vastly more of the crimes that necessitate such confrontations.  The whole edifice of the Black Lives Matter campaign is built upon a demonstrably fraudulent foundation of lies and calumnies. 

                Outrageously, however, Obama is apt to subtly re-insinuate this dangerous  fallacy when he delivers his supposedly "healing" message at the memorial for the murdered Dallas policemen.  If he does, let us hope that his deeply dishonest message is treated with the contempt it deserves.