The Dark Side of Racism

stl-tp-logo-dark-200x200
For the past three weeks, the citizens of St. Louis have been able to see themselves and others in a completely different light. It is not a good one. Oh sure, the recent shooting of 18 year old Michael Brown, a black teenager by a white police officer, has had many people, black and white, calling for peace and waiting for all of the facts to come in for a full and complete investigation. They have helped each other clean up after days of looting and rioting. They have sat in church together and tried to heal their community.
  But it has brought out the very worst as well. Not just the obvious in looters and rioters, but the subtle, the unseen, the things people don't like to own up to.
  We know that bigots come in all shapes, sizes and yes, colors. They will usually train their vitriol on others who don't look like them, or have differing opinions and views. But whenever a high profile case, especially of a racial nature is front and center, a special brand of hate is unleashed at black conservatives.
  This time however, was different. It hit much closer to home. Why? Because the object of so much venom was my dear friend Martin Baker. Martin is certainly no stranger to the political landscape that is reserved for black conservatives. Having run for office a few times, and being on the front lines with various conservative groups, Martin is well prepared for the name calling, the smears, and all of the usual tactics used by liberals, especially black liberals, against other blacks. When he attended a rally recently in support not so much for Officer Darrin Wilson, but for law and order, for transparency, and for the fair and impartial carrying out of justice, a picture of Martin showed up on Twitter, and it was open season on anything and anyone Martin Baker holds dear.
  He was viciously attacked in any way a person can be, but it was all really aimed in only one direction, his political beliefs. For some reason, most black liberals don't know that groups like the KKK were started by Democrats. They don't know that every single piece of civil rights legislation passed in the 1960's passed because of Republicans. Democrats blocked it every way they could. But conservatives, Frederick Douglass conservatives like Martin Baker know the true history of the Democrat Party.
  But never mind the facts. Facts are pesky things sometimes. So not wanting those pesky facts to get in the way, those brave
champions of civil rights lurking behind anonymous Twitter handles went to work. Decorum prevents this Blogger from repeating most of them here, but you get the idea:
  "@Afrocentricity", (is that even a word?) said, "How U gon support Darren Wilson? U a clown, all u missing is the red nose. U no longer black". Mr. Centricity, apparent self-arbiter of all things "black", was the most polite of the bunch. "@A.Pink", could that be short for pinko or communist? Perhaps. He at least made it to the spelling portion of grade school, but unfortunately, he does not get an "A" for originality. "People can you believe this Uncle Tom? He's a lead supporter of the criminal cop that murdered Mike Brown." With random folks with law degrees running around like Mr. Pink(o), who needs a jury? Of course the usual Shakespearean wannabes who like to scribble "sell out" and the n-word all over anything that doesn't move made their presence known as well.
  Why is it that all black people are required to think alike? Why is it that when black conservatives dare stray from the "Audacity of Hope" bandwagon, and form their own thoughts and opinions, they are deemed, "not officially black"? Doesn't freedom not only mean physical freedom, but intellectual freedom as well? Is this not what black people and many white people have fought and died for?
  Men like Martin Baker are a rare breed. They march to the beat of their own drum. Their beliefs are unbending, never wavering, because they know those beliefs to be the truth. They stand up for those beliefs when it is not cool, and even dangerous to do so.
  If that is the definition of "sell out", America is in desperate need of them.     

Where I’m Kicking Off My Ferguson BUYcott Saturday

stl-tp-logo-dark-200x200

Original Post: Where I’m Kicking Off My Ferguson BUYcott Saturday.

At 1:00 PM, I’ll be at  911 Beauty Salon: 9193 W Florissant Ave, St Louis, MO 63136, Cross Streets: Between Ferguson Ave and Canfield Dr. Let us know your story here. Upload photos, reciepts, and stories. People love stories. You are welcome to join me there at 1:00, or shop and dine on your own. This Ferguson BUYcott…

The post Where I’m Kicking Off My Ferguson BUYcott Saturday appeared first on Hennessy's View.

Don’t Believe the Media: The Deficit Is Not Looking Good

stl-tp-logo-dark-200x200

No one is surprised but it’s always like a blast of cold air to hear a new total for the United States deficit. This year’s CBO forecast reported a federal deficit of $506 billion and spending is projected to be around $3.5 trillion.

Something’s got to give.  While news reports are calling the federal deficit “relatively modest,” it’s hardly a number to scoff at. The number is down from last year’s $680 billion but there’s a lot of work to do – and the best place to start shoveling is in America’s huge pile of entitlements.

Total mandatory spending for 2014 was $2.54 trillion, which included social security, Medicare, Medicaid, other healthcare expenses and net interest. The idea of cutting entitlements isn’t fun – but it’s necessary to create a sustainable future for the country.

Unfortunately, while President Obama is in office, things don’t look to be changing and Medicaid will account for the largest increase in spending this year, with Social Security coming in second.

On the Left, Rep. Chris Van Hollen, ranking Member of the Budget Committee, blamed Republicans for a protecting “special interests and the very wealthy.”

Republicans blame out of control spending, of which entitlements are a major part. Unfortunately, the gridlock will ensue until at least 2015.  And if we’re to believe CBO, things are looking scary. They write in their report:

“Later in the coming decade, if current laws governing federal taxes and spending generally remain unchanged, revenues would grow only slightly faster than the economy and spending would increase more rapidly.”

If you feel like taking this up with anyone at the Budget Committee, here’s the list.

I Would Like to Talk to You on Tuesday September 2

Tea Party

Original Post: I Would Like to Talk to You on Tuesday September 2.

Hi. Bill Hennessy here. If you can, please stop by 111 Clarkson Executive Park, Ellisville, MO 63011 on Tuesday, September 2 at 7 p.m. (RSVP Here if you’d like.) I have something I’d like to talk to you about. It’s about the tea party movement. But it’s really about understanding two very important concepts: Living to…

The post I Would Like to Talk to You on Tuesday September 2 appeared first on Hennessy's View.

Will Amnesty Make an Appearance in this Year’s Lame-Duck Session?

stl-tp-logo-dark-200x200

As the peak frenzy of the nation’s border crisis settles, the question of immigration reform remains unanswered. President Obama and his pro-amnesty cohorts have promised to move on the matter but we’ve yet to see tangible evidence.

Even Republicans are pushing for amnesty-like reforms and many think they’ll move forward with such policies during this year’s lame-duck session.

Rep. Steve King (R-IA), who is against reform that includes any version of amnesty, said he thinks GOP leadership may “spring it on us” after November.

President Obama is entering the last two years of his Presidency, and may feel at liberty to implement extremist policies like amnesty in hopes of leaving a legacy.

In fact, Sen. Chuck Schumer said recently that if Republicans don’t act, “the President will have no choice but to act on his own.”

The subject is especially touchy because of the GOP divide. Other usually Republican supporters, such as the Chamber of Commerce, have put pressure on Republicans to pass reform as well,saying “If the Republicans don’t do it, they shouldn’t bother to run a candidate in 2016.”

Most recently, Chamber of Commerce CEO Tom Donohue and Jay Timmons, CEO of the National Association of Manufacturers, have pushed hard for Congress to pass amnesty legislation by the end of the year.

Timmons said he thinks it will be the last piece of legislation passed in this year’s lame-duck session.

However earlier this year, Speaker John Boehner vowed that Republicans would block any vote on immigration in 2014. Boehner told Obama that “the American people and their elected officials don’t trust him to enforce the law as written.”

Opinions from our nation’s leaders, from liberal to conservative, are across the board on what proper immigration reform will look like. The question now is what legislation can the majority agree on to move the needle forward on this pressing issue? The lame-duck session may provide a temporary answer.

Shop Ferguson and Dellwood This Weekend

stl-tp-logo-dark-200x200

Original Post: Shop Ferguson and Dellwood This Weekend.

Sorry I’m so late on this. This sounds whiny, I know, but I have a really involved week at work this week. Sorry. Crap always seems to work out this way, though. When there’s a great need for Tea Party services, I’m tied up with work obligations. Something has to give, and it’s usually the…

The post Shop Ferguson and Dellwood This Weekend appeared first on Hennessy's View.

Lessons from Ferguson

push-back-sq
The Unablogger

The Unablogger

Democrat pols are busily seeking to take political advantage of the Ferguson tragedy by linking voter registration to the protests. Perhaps the Democrats should be careful what they wish for.

The Ferguson tragedy occurred just days after the first African American St. Louis County Executive was ousted by a white challenger in a racially charged Democratic primary. Primary victor Steve Stenger made a point of viciously trashing the African American incumbent. A key element of the campaign was the endorsement by Democratic County Prosecutor Bob McCulloch, who made vague accusations of corruption even though he never brought charges or convened a grand jury on the subject. Yes, that’s the same Bob McCulloch who is resisting protesters’ demands for charges against the police officer who killed Michael Brown.

The other key players are also Democrats. Although nominally non-partisan, it is inconceivable that Ferguson city officials like Mayor James Knowles could have been elected without the blessing of local Democratic leaders. Embattled Ferguson police chief Thomas Jackson was placed in office by the mayor and city council, all likely Democrats. County police chief Jon Belmar is a “non-partisan” political appointee of a police board appointed by Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon, who is under fire for his delayed, then ambiguous and ultimately inadequate reaction to the Ferguson riots.

More significantly, almost all of African Americans long-term problems have been brought on by a parade of policy failures by Democrats. Blacks remain proud of and loyal to President Obama, but their economic plight has worsened during his administration. While overall unemployment has rebounded back to the level when the President took office, black unemployment remains high. Democrat economic policies have eliminated full-time jobs, replaced them with part-time jobs without benefits. Cuts in military personnel are cutting off a major avenue of African American advancement. Meanwhile, a soaring stock market, driven by cheap-money monetary policies, makes the top 1% even richer, thereby worsening the very income gap between the races that the party rails against. And now, the President’s encouragement of illegal immigration threatens to provide competition for the poorest blacks for the low-wage entry-level jobs that they need for subsistence.

So, let’s get this straight. Stenger. McCulloch. Nixon. Social and economic woes brought on or worsened by Democratic office holders. This is what African Americans are expected to rally and support?

In contrast, on the same day county Democrats were denying renomination to the black county executive, a contested Republican primary in predominantly white southwest St. Louis County resoundingly nominated Ballwin Alderman Shamed Dogan, an African American former aide to former Sen. Jim Talent (R-MO), for a seat in the Missouri legislature. Dogan now runs unopposed for the safely Republican seat in the general election. And during the Ferguson crisis itself, while prominent Democrats were jockeying for time on camera, the St. Louis Tea Party Coalition organized a BUYcott to help Ferguson shops that had been devastated by the riots.

For sure, African Americans have supported Democratic candidates since the Great Depression, but the popular definition of insanity is the repeating the same thing over and over while expecting a different result. Apparently Democrats are counting on African American voters being crazy.

What should concerned African Americans learn from the Ferguson debacle? A better strategy for this election year would be to stand down and refuse to validate their Democrat oppressors. Ferguson underscores how their leaders have misled them. While significant ticket splitting for Rick Stream, the Republican candidate for county executive, would send a powerful message, standing down and refusing to vote at all would send an even stronger message. Instead of being reliable votes for a Democratic Party that takes them for granted and fails to produce for them, African Americans would be better served by listening and giving serious consideration to different approaches. Iowa farmers get whatever they want from Congress because they shift their votes back and forth depending on whichever party best serves their interests. African Americans should learn from their example.

The spontaneous Tea Party BUYcott demonstrated that conservatives aren’t out to get African Americans and do really care. Democrat opportunists seeking to fan the flames of violence demonstrated that Democrats really don’t.


Serpents and Doves

stl-tp-logo-dark-200x200

President Obama has been leading from behind when it comes to foreign policy. That fact is very apparent right now more than ever.

We have seen this with Guantanamo Bay, in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria. And as President Obama and his team have vacated the premises on foreign policy, Senators like Ted Cruz have taken the lead in shutting out the Iranian Ambassador from the United Nations, supporting Israel, and in interaction with Russia regarding the Ukraine crisis in what some see as the first steps to rebuilding the USSR.

President Putin and Russia’s leadership have been betting on all the horses and petty dictators that the United States of America is betting against.  With Russia’s recent pushes against Ukraine largely ignored, it is for the United States to reassert itself on the international stage.

As Obama has abdicated his place of leadership for tee times, it is time for us to no longer wait on a Commander in Chief who has shown that he and his administration are unwilling to act. Congress is coming off of its recess and should stand resolved to do what they can, without military intervention, to impact nations fostering animosity towards our Republic.

The ability for the United States of America to have a direct impact on Russia does not require a carrier group to be anchored in the Barents or Black Sea. Congress must simply take the first step of taking funding away.

Congress holds the purse strings to an ever-growing amount of foreign aid, a significant portion of which is going to countries who are not earning the friendship of the United States of America.

In fiscal year 2012, $440.9 million of our taxpayer dollars were obligated to Russia in foreign aid (for the Top 25 countries that received millions of our taxpayer dollars, go here to see the list).

It’s a head scratcher-we fully admit it.

We wonder how quickly Russia would stop bullying former states of the USSR for their own financial gain if we pulled the purse? On a different topic, how different the Mexican border would look if the United States spent the money on the southern border instead of across it (Mexico received over $200 million our dollars in 2012 in foreign aid)?

This is not a call to end all foreign aid. However, it is a call to restructure how we hand out our money and to whom.

Defining Conservatism

stl-tp-logo-dark-200x200

It’s Campaign 101 sort of stuff -define your opponent before he defines you. For years, there has been a struggle to define terms in American politics: conservative, liberal, tea party, leftist, socialist, big government, crony capitalism, etc. The list could go on and on.

Many of these terms are bandied about by politicians and pundits with no real attempt to actually define them. In recent years, politicians and others have taken great liberties to slap whatever label they want to on a given issue and hope that it passes muster.

Those of us who follow the inside baseball of politics remember when Matt Latimer wrote that George W. Bush and those inside his administration either 1) didn’t know there was such a thing as a “conservative movement” or 2) felt they could redefine what conservative meant. We remember reading Matt’s articles and the write-ups on his book, Speech-Less: Tales of a White House Survivor, and chuckling at some of the stories he told. They seemed impossible, but No Child Left Behind, Medicare Part D, TARP and other legacies from the Bush Administration said otherwise. On all of these was slapped the label “compassionate conservatism.”

Frankly, none of them were either compassionate or were they conservative. They were bald-faced attempts to buy off constituencies and special interests and soothe conservative angst by slapping “conservative” on them.

So what do we mean by “conservative”? How do we define “conservatism”? Words and the definition of them are fundamental for so many things, not the least of which is to be able to argue definitively for or against something.

Consider for a moment if words lost their meaning. How would people interact? How would conversations have any sort of meaning if words had no definitions?

This is our attempt to at least start a conversation. There will be some who will disagree with us and that’s fine. Our goal with this blog and others to follow is to answer the questions: Are there hard and fast tenants of conservatism and if there are, what are they?

So let’s start by defining “conservative” and for the sake of keeping things simple, a simple definition with suffice.

A conservative is one who believes in limited government, the free enterprise system, the sanctity of life, lower taxes and the freedom to make individual decisions within the parameters of an ordered society. In other words, for society to function properly, there must be a list of do’s and don’ts.

Here’s where things get interesting.

What is “conservatism”? Are there core tenants to it, principles to live by?

The answer is yes.

Let’s follow up with this question: Is expanding government conservative? The question itself seems trivial, but there are many in Washington, DC and state capitols that tie themselves in knots trying to justify the expansion of government in the name of conservatism (see “compassionate conservatism” above.).

Take for example the Internet Sales Tax pushed by some who call themselves conservative. The argument made by them and their corporate funders is that it is conservative to take the Internet sales tax away from the federal government and give it to the states. Better yet, this tax creates jobs.

At first glance, the argument seems sound enough until you realize that this now gives 49 states the ability to collect taxes from the 50th and so on and so forth. The latter is the argument big government advocates make all the time: this new government program creates jobs!

So ask yourself: does the Internet Sales Tax create more or less government? Does it create more dependence on government or less? There are fundamental tenets of conservatism. You cannot be for the expansion of government and dependence on it and call yourself or the issue you are pushing conservative.

The argument will be made that it is the “fair” thing to do as brick and mortar retailers like Wal-Mart are taxed differently than online entities like eBay. But is a conservative solution one that creates more red tape or reduces it for all parties? Is it fair to create more government bureaucracy for small online businesses?

The obvious answer is to reduce the intrusion of government into the marketplace, not expand it.

Over the next few weeks, we will dig deeper into this issue and next week tackle the question: can you be fiscally conservative and socially moderate and still be considered a conservative?

Bureaucratizing Street Gangs

news

Original Post: Bureaucratizing Street Gangs.

Did you ever wonder why do-gooders and social planners never pay for their crimes? Yesterday, I wrote about Jesse Jackson dressing down at the hands of activists in a McDonald’s parking lot in Ferguson. I pointed out that Martin Luther King and Dick Gregory were similarly dismissed by rioters in the 1960s. Some things never change.…

The post Bureaucratizing Street Gangs appeared first on Hennessy's View.