ConservativeBlog.org

Featuring the Work and Ideas of the National
Center for Public Policy Research & Project 21

CONSERVATIVEBLOG.ORG

Featuring the Work and Ideas of the National Center for Public Policy Research & Project 21

Left Pushes Destructive Racial Narrative in Atlanta Murders

Left Pushes Destructive Racial Narrative in Atlanta Murders

While the alleged shooter in the recent Atlanta massage parlor murders has reportedly said his motivation was sexual, the media and liberal activists – with adherents located as far up as the Oval Office – are trying to push the narrative of a racial motivation.

Project 21 Co-Chairman Horace Cooper called this narrative “dangerous” and “toxic.” In an interview with Tucker Carlson on the Fox News Channel, he noted that the left is doing everything it can to promote a racial message, ignoring the lack of facts upon which such a claim could be based.

“It looks like the left has a problem,” Horace said. “Their coalition is actually at war with itself.”

He explained:

If you say “let’s defund the police,” if you say “let’s allow untold number of migrants from other countries to come in and compete with working-class people,” if you divide us along intersectional lines – all of those complete with one another.

By focusing on race, the left provides itself with “a way to reinforce what it already believes,” said Horace. In fact, and disturbingly, the left can’t see things any other way:

 [W]hat you see is this story has to be true. It’s too good not to be true.

But such a claim cannot be proven:

[They] believe the biggest threat to America today – the biggest – is white men who are going to attack you at any time you are vulnerable.

Even though, as you pointed out, you can look at the Department of Justice/FBI statistics that have been kept under the Trump Administration, under eight years of the Obama Administration, eight years of the Bush Administration, all the way back to eight years of the Clinton Administration and further, and you’ll see a very, very interesting data point.

The description of the person who is most likely to rob you, rape you or in some way violate your property rights in a dangerous way is not a white male…

We don’t focus on the group itself.  But if the media – that says that they can pick a racial narrative to explain things – had ignored for 25 years that the poor failing schools, the poor employment options that are presented and the way that they have preferred elites in America over the mainstream have contributed to a very very toxic circumstance that is easily exploited by groups like Black Lives Matter and others that are promoting their intersectional rivalry.

The victim of the left’s civil war with its own factions, facts and logic is the racial harmony for which it claims to strive. This creates a potential flashpoint that worries Horace:

It is toxic. It’s dangerous. Unfortunately for us, the mainstream media thinks this story is so good we just need to repeat it even when it falls apart right in front of our eyes.

In sad reflection and complete agreement, Carlson replied: “Man, they’re really playing with fire.”

Mob’s Influence Threatens Fair Floyd Trial in Minneapolis

Mob’s Influence Threatens Fair Floyd Trial in Minneapolis

In Minneapolis, jurors are being selected for the trial of Derek Chauvin, one of the former police officers charged in the death of George Floyd.

After a riotous year of racial strife generated by the incident, Raymond Arroyo – guest-hosting on the Fox News Channel program “The Ingraham Angle” – asked  Project 21 Co-Chairman Horace Cooper: “Do you expect a repeat of last summer’s riots?”

Horace noted that the liberal establishment and mainstream media have helped promote a mob mentality in the alleged pursuit of justice. But he warned against their divisive strategy.

“It will never be a good idea to take this approach,” he said.

Horace went on to explain:

We’ve seen evidence over a hundred-year span that when the crowd, when the mob, decides that they’re going to determine whether or not a trial is gonna take place, whether or not a prosecution is gonna take place, when they do that, all of the evidence shows bad things happen.

You can look at Wilmington in 1989, where a black community was overwhelmingly destroyed. You can look at Atlanta in 1906. You can look in East St. Louis in 1917. In each of these instances, people pretended that the prosecutors had failed to intervene and prosecute people they wanted. And, as a result, they decided to unleash mayhem.

Not unlike the $1+ billion worth of damage that we’ve seen in America as a result of so-called riots that were called largely or mostly peaceful.

In particular, with regard to the Chauvin case, Arroyo asked Horace if the city’s decision to offer and announce – with great fanfare – a $27 million settlement with the Floyd family “pollute[s] the juror pool.” Horace replied:

It absolutely pollutes the pool!

In fact, even as they’re doing jury selection, they’re finding jurors who are aware that this staggering $27 million award occurred.

Horace added that this already appears to be tainting the case as well as sets a bad precedent:

Let me tell you something. That influences people. You could go to a typical black American and say to them: “I’ll give you $27 million if you just vote to acquit in the Chauvin case.” And guess what? You’d get takers.

The point is, that kind of information, and that kind of activity, has a negative and deleterious effect.

“Our system is supposed to say to every person – every person – that they’re entitled to a trial that is fair on their terms,” Horace noted, “and not one that is subject to what the mob wants.”

Yes, There Is a Crisis at the Border. Yes, the Biden Administration Is Responsible.

Yes, There Is a Crisis at the Border. Yes, the Biden Administration Is Responsible.

“Border Crossings Are at Record Lows as Trump Declares a National Emergency to Build a Wall,” read the headline of a 2019 CNBC article. However reluctantly, the mainstream media had to admit it: President Trump had made effective progress in securing the southern border of the United States.

Davis Soderberg

Davis Soderberg

Now we have a much different situation. In February alone, U.S. border agents detained nearly 100,000 illegal aliens crossing the U.S.-Mexico border  — 22,000 more than in January. One Texas migrant facility has reached 729% capacity, forcing children to sleep on the floor and shower only once every 5 days. That can’t be good, especially considering we are in the middle of a global pandemic.

Norah O’Donnell reported on Tuesday that 13,000 unaccompanied minors were in U.S. custody. That number had nearly tripled overnight, as only 4,561 had been reported on Monday.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas even admitted that the United States is “on pace to encounter more individuals at the southwest border than we have in the last 20 years.” The skyrocketing surge leaves the Biden Administration scrambling to control the negative results of its bad immigration policies.

In typical political blame-game fashion, Biden Press Secretary Jen Psaki claimed, “the last administration left us a dismantled and unworkable system and, like any other problem, we are going to do all we can to solve it.”

That is utter nonsense and a blatant lie. How stupid does Jen Psaki think we are?

The Biden Administration is well aware it has created this crisis, and it is doing everything in its power to cast the blame on its favorite target, Donald Trump, because you know, “orange man bad,” of course.

President Biden finally emerged from hiding to address the situation, telling migrants, “don’t come over… don’t leave your town or city or community.” I have my doubts about whether Biden’s words will be effective on the matter, considering these immigrants are fully aware that the president supports open borders and amnesty. They’ll want to use the opportunity while it’s in front of them.

Hours into Biden’s presidency, he lifted the “Remain in Mexico” policy through executive order, which turned out to be a disastrous decision. The policy, enacted by President Trump, forced asylum seekers to wait in Mexico for their immigration hearings. But under Biden, these illegal immigrants get released into the United States.

Not to mention, the Farm Workforce Modernization Act of 2021 — which Biden would likely sign into law — is being voted on in Congress this week. This legislation would allow more than 1.5 million undocumented farm workers to apply for legal status if they have worked at least 180 days in agriculture over the past 2 years.

Additionally, the American Dream and Promise Act, which passed the House on Thursday, provides amnesty and green cards to millions of illegal immigrants. The Heritage Foundation slammed the legislation for “rewarding illegal aliens at the expense of American citizens. It is nothing less than a bold attempt to trade American national security, sovereignty, and well-being for perceived political benefit.”

Why doesn’t the Biden Administration support immigration legislation that puts the interest of American taxpayers first, and that rewards immigrants who take the time to legally become citizens?

The current state of our borders is not only detrimental to the United States, but it also diminishes the native countries from which these immigrants are fleeing. At the same time, drug cartels are using the immigration episode to hit the jackpot.

On his Fox News program Tuesday night, Tucker Carlson interviewed President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador. While Americans normally focus on how immigration surges overwhelm the United States, the El Salvadorian leader provided insight into how all involved nations are affected.

President Bukele explained that the emigration surge is draining his country of its hard-working innovators. El Salvadorians are now embarking on the journey north rather than driving his nation’s economy.

Let me be clear on this: America should always want talented, hard-working immigrants to become citizens. Immigrants have long added to the exceptionalism of the United States, bettering our country with their skills. I’m not anti-immigration; I’m just sensibly anti-chaos, and that’s what Biden’s policies have produced. The current numbers are not manageable, and the migrants are breaking the law. Biden has created a lose-lose situation for all countries involved.

The next issue – and arguably the most concerning – is how the cartels are using the immigration surge to boost their power and influence.

On Tuesday night, Former Texas Border Security Captain Jaeson Jones told Carlson how the cartels line the Rio Grande, so as migrants pass through into the United States, they must pay thousands of dollars to the gangs.

Once migrants have made their payments (which fluctuate in price based on one’s race) they are given a colored wristband signifying their payment. “They run it like a business,” said Theresa Cardinal Brown of the Bipartisan Policy Center. “This is a money-making operation and they have to pay close attention to who has paid. This may be a new way to keep track.”

Jones showed Carlson a video of himself watching a gun battle between two cartels. Gunfire broke out at eight in the morning between Cartel Delgado and Cartel Del Noreste, creating audio that sounded as if Jones was in a full-fledged war zone. Carlson quickly noted to viewers that this is “not Iraq, but Texas.”

Maybe if we deployed the thousands the troops at the United States Capitol (or should I say Fort Pelosi) to the southern border we would be able to control the situation. But to Democrats, the nonexistent threat in Washington, D.C. poses more danger than the crisis at the border.

The current border situation is shameful, and it’s due to bad policy.

This is a crisis, and the Biden Administration is fully responsible.

Davis Soderberg is an associate for the Free Enterprise Project at the National Center for Public Policy Research. Follow him on Twitter at @soderberg_davis.

Disaffecting Legal Voters is Voter Suppression

Disaffecting Legal Voters is Voter Suppression

The real problem with American election rules isn’t that people lack the opportunity to vote. The real problem is that people “don’t think their vote is going to make a difference.”

Efforts by liberals to allegedly increase voter access through schemes such as mail-in ballots, lax voter registration rules and no voter integrity protections such as ID requirements are causing potential law-abiding voters to become disaffected by the process. This is the kind of voter suppression perpetrated by the left that conservative election reforms are designed to combat.

But progressive political activists, such as failed gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, are railing against Georgia proposals designed to regain public trust. Abrams claims that efforts to return absentee voting and early balloting to traditional timeframes, to reduce the number of ballot drop boxes and to ask voters to prove their identity are “racist” and a “redux of Jim Crow.”

On the Fox News Channel program “Fox News @ Night,” Project 21 Co-Chairman Horace Cooper argued that voter integrity protections should not simply be dismissed with divisive rhetoric:

You have to separate two issues.

One is the fake claim that this is race-based. There is no evidence that having to use fewer boxes is going to affect more blacks than whites, or more browns than whites…. And there is no proof or evidence that having to demonstrate actual evidence that you’re a real citizen entitled to vote affects – again – one race over another.

The idea that we should address, the big problem that most Americans say for the reason that they don’t participate in the vote, is they don’t think that their vote is going to make a difference.

If you provide voter integrity measures, you ensure that people can be confident that if they participate it will matter.

The topic then turned to the federal legislation promoted by liberals that would do the opposite of many of the Georgia proposals. It would further allow for practices such as “ballot harvesting” and lower standards for ballot access as well as prohibit voter ID protections. Horace welcomed a more robust debate in the Senate that was not allowed in the House of Representatives (where there were no hearings before the massive bill was quickly put to a vote).

Horace noted that the focus needs to be on election integrity:

This isn’t about race. This is about political parties trying to advantage themselves.

The Constitution allows political parties to try to manipulate the process. The Constitution doesn’t allow the use of race as a means of accomplishing that.

The problem here is Stacey Abrams, and even Nancy Pelosi, tries to pretend that there is a race issue when there isn’t. Why not come right out and say, “we’re funding candidates that wouldn’t otherwise get support because we… want to see that we get an advantage.”

Let’s have a debate, and then that’s a real debate.

In its original “Blueprint for a Better Deal for Black America,” Project 21 recommended several election reform measures, including voter ID, proof of citizenship, cleaning up voter lists and not mailing ballots to those who do not request them. A new edition of the Blueprint is in production, and includes recommendations such as ending same-day and automatic voter registration allowances, stopping ballot harvesting and mandating that only citizens may vote.

Project 21 also recently participated in the U.S. Supreme Court case of Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee that could determine the constitutionality of ballot harvesting and out-of-precinct provisional voting. A decision in that case is expected in late June.

Vote the Corporate Bums Out

Vote the Corporate Bums Out

For a long time, the prescribed conservative remedy to leftist bias and bullying was to separate from society and “build our own” infrastructure. One such example would be the desire for a conservative social media network.

But when Parler came along, “Amazon disappeared Parler with the stroke of a key,” notes Justin Danhof, Esq.

In a Breitbart commentary, Justin – the director of the National Center’s Free Enterprise Project – explains:

Parler was declared unfit by these corporate oligarchs simply because it allowed conservatives to freely communicate.

Conservatives built. Conservatives came. And the left took notice, responding by tearing asunder what conservatives had built.

What to do next?

In his commentary, Justin implores conservatives not to fall back on the other conservative separation strategy of wanting to remove themselves from the marketplace through a boycott of liberal companies.

Instead, Justin advocates for conservatives to engage businesses that are at odds with them and their values:

When big business teams up with the political left and takes actions that are anathema to conservatives, the right-wing reaction is almost always to call for a boycott. But sit back and ask yourself when that has ever worked. Remember when conservatives were going to boycott Nike after it signed cop-hating Colin Kaepernick to a multimillion-dollar endorsement deal? They didn’t. So when Kaepernick demanded that Nike pull a shoe honoring Betsy Ross and the American flag from store shelves, Nike’s management complied. Conservatives once again threatened to boycott. They didn’t. So now Nike knows that these are hollow threats.

Justin chronicles similar conservative boycott failures against Coca-Cola, Disney, Proctor and Gamble and the NFL.

And it would be even more disastrous if conservative investors and conservative pension fund managers divested themselves from companies that are pushing the liberal agenda.

“What conservatives should do instead,” Justin writes, “is engage with corporate leaders who do the bidding of the political left.”

For example, when talking won’t lead to a happy understanding, conservative investors can “vote the bums out”:

Every publicly traded company holds an annual shareholder meeting at which investors have an opportunity to vote for or against board members. But the numbers prove that conservative investors aren’t voting…

Imagine what would happen if conservative shareholders and red state pension fund managers all started voting against board members of the far-left companies that are corrupting the culture. Perhaps some business leaders would decide it’s no longer worth doing the woke left’s political bidding and focus instead on improving their respective companies.

Justin explains that, in the case of Apple, around 30% of the votes given to shareholders were not cast. This could have made a difference in some cases – or at least sent a powerful message that would make corporate leaders take notice.

It would certainly make more of a statement than idle threats to not buy a soft drink or to cancel a streaming service.

Read all of Justin’s Breitbart commentary – “Vote the Corporate Bums Out” – by clicking here.

Forget Coke – It’s Tea Time Once Again

Forget Coke – It’s Tea Time Once Again

Back in 1971, Coca-Cola sought to promote racial harmony through its “Hilltop” commercial. In it, a multiethnic group sang a version of the altruistic and hippy-dippy “I’d Like to Teach the World to Sing” in perfect harmony — finding racial reconciliation through the purchase of a sugary carbonated beverage.

Now, after surrendering to the demands of the woke mob, the message from Coke is – literally – “try to be less white.”

In a Townhall commentary, Free Enterprise Project (FEP) Deputy Director Scott Shepard notes that this new turn “reflects fairly horribly on Coca-Cola.” With a slap in the face of the 50-year-old commercial, the new mindset actually pits races against each other through the leftist mantra that “America is a racist cesspit”:

The materials did not, mind, instruct employees to “participate less in whiteness,” though even that would still be appalling. Nope. Just “try to be less white,” with being white described as doing all sorts of bad things which all people do to varying degrees throughout their life, wholly without regard to race, ethnicity, sex, sexual attraction or anything else.

One in the long list of unattractive attributes that the training identified as uniquely white was arrogance. Anyone old enough to remember the Obama Administration will know whether arrogance is unique to white people.

In the remarkably brash, in-your-face attitude that epitomizes leftist activism in 2021, dissenting views – even from minorities – are simply not allowed:

The woke project is not about race; it is about foisting a complex set of leftwing ideological positions and pathologies on American society. Wrapping it all up in race is a way of shutting up opponents…

[G]ussied up in lots of purposively inscrutable academic jargon, the civil-conflict stirrers of the left trot out what amounts to nothing more than the old Uncle Tom trope: people who are not white but who disagree with their positions are really just trying to live in parasitical whiteness, in order to earn all that reflected glory.

“Purposefully telling employees that their race makes them inherently bad and then telling them to be less like their race, for the benefit of people of other races,” Scott points out, “is exquisitely unconstitutional.”

What is a conscientious consumer to do? Scott advises that people take the left’s advice to not have anything to do with those practicing overt racism. And that would be Coca-Cola. And since Pepsi is similarly steeped in wokeness, Scott wryly suggests that “it’s teatime.”

FEP has participated in several Coca-Cola shareholder meetings, criticizing the corporate giant on issues including religious freedom, genetically modified organisms and welfare policy.

To read Scott’s Townhall commentary – “’Multiracial Whiteness’ Gives the Game Away – Why Are Corporations Still Playing?” – click here.

Harriet Tubman, Conservative Icon

Harriet Tubman, Conservative Icon

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki has said that resuming the process of putting abolitionist Harriet Tubman on the $20 bill is important so that American money “reflect[s] the history and diversity of our country.”

Donna Jackson

And while the left celebrates Tubman for being a woman and person of color, Project 21 member Donna Jackson writes that this choice can also be seen as a win for conservatives, because Tubman’s faith and conservative-compatible beliefs can be celebrated long after the left has moved on to its next crusade:

History serves as a lesson for modern-day issues. There is a fight for freedom and individual liberty being waged today, especially in a climate of overreaching government and cancel culture. Conservatives today are faced with censorship, harsh gun controls and restrictions on religious liberties. Tubman’s legacy can inspire determination in all of us to ensure that we, as a people, never lose our rights.

Donna’s commentary, which has appeared in major-market newspapers such as the Minneapolis Star Tribune and Kansas City Star, argues that it’s important to recognize Tubman beyond her intersectional value:

While liberals bask in the blinding glow of superficial identity politics, patting themselves on the back for replacing villainous former President Andrew Jackson, conservatives can also celebrate this choice. They can do that by looking beyond Tubman’s color to celebrate her beliefs, her life and her deeds.

In particular, Donna praises the way the abolitionist’s faith guided her decisions:

Tubman’s faith emboldened her to risk everything to aid escaped slaves, and inspired her to recognize the dignity in every life. She talked to God, and said he talked back (something former Vice President Mike Pence was mocked for saying). She said the Underground Railroad was not her idea, but rather divine inspiration from the Lord.

Donna also mentions how Tubman sought the help of other Christians – including white Christians – along the stops of the Underground Railroad:

In working with those people, Tubman was colorblind in a way many of today’s race-obsessed activists could never understand…

Tubman fought for freedom, liberty and all the rights guaranteed to us by God and the Constitution. While she probably never heard the term “conservative,” she nonetheless exhibited values characteristic of a modern conservative.

“Her example serves as a reminder to be brave,” Donna writes, “and have the courage to fight for what is right.”

To read all of Donna’s commentary – “We Should Honor a Conservative on the $20 bill. Her Name is Harriet Tubman” – click here to go to the Kansas City Star’s website.

Becerra Lacks “Respect” and “Character” to Run HHS

Becerra Lacks “Respect” and “Character” to Run HHS

In a letter to the U.S. Senate calling Xavier Becerra an “extremist nominee who will carry the agendas of liberal dark money groups to his administration post,” a group of over 100 prominent conservatives – including National Center General Counsel Justin Danhof, Esq. – laid out their opposition to the nomination of Becerra to run the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

The letter states:

Becerra has shown neither the judgment, character or respect for human life necessary to lead the agency with such influence over the foundational rights of all Americans. Under his watch, we believe HHS – an agency that should protect human life, dignity, and enshrine the values of religious liberty – would be weaponized toward partisan and destructive ends.

The letter also highlights Becerra’s radicalism as a member of the U.S. Congress and as California’s attorney general. It notes his “dubious judgment” in matters such as advocating for on-demand abortion, forcing faith-based organizations like the Little Sisters of the Poor to fund birth control, suppressing investigative journalism and promoting unscientific “environmental justice” policies.

Joining Justin in signing the letter are Concerned Women for America President and CEO Penny Y. Nance, former Interior and Energy Secretary Donald Paul Hodel, Alliance Defending Freedom Founder Alan E. Sears, Young America’s Foundation President Scott Walker, American Energy Alliance President Thomas Pyle and Galen Institute President Grace-Marie Turner.

To read the entire letter and see the full list of signers (using titles for identification only), click here.

Royal Race Controversy Lacks Context

Royal Race Controversy Lacks Context

Saying the British media “never really gave her a chance,” Project 21 Co-Chairman Stacy Washington characterized the treatment of Meghan Markle as “brutal” and “frightening.”

That being said, when it came to an assertion that Markle made in an interview with Oprah Winfrey that a member of the royal family had expressed “concerns” about the skin color of her then-unborn child with Prince Harry, Stacy said, “I just want context.”

In a segment on the Newsmax TV program “Wake Up America” that discussed the British royal family and race, Stacy pointed out that “extended family relations can be fraught with difficulties.” Since Markle’s assertion was left hanging, with no name assigned to the alleged comment, Stacy remarked:

I would have preferred for her to give some more context there rather than to drop that bombshell without anything further.

Stacy then brought up her own experiences to explain the need for context regarding such conversations:

Many, many family members – including my own – when you look at the variations in skin tone, discussions are had. Whose hair do you think the baby will have?  Whose skin tone do you think the baby will have? And babies always surprise us…

So we don’t know the context in which that discussion was had. If it was had in a racially incendiary context , then it’s horrifying. But if it was had in a nonchalant way… that can be a discussion that’s had that’s not racially incendiary.

This is especially important since Markle is publicly at odds with her in-laws.

“[I]f you have a bad relationship with someone, and they bring up something that’s sensitive to you,” Stacy noted, “you’re going to take it in a bad way even if they don’t mean it.”

Cuomo’s Sex Scandal Obscures His Nursing Home Scandal

Cuomo’s Sex Scandal Obscures His Nursing Home Scandal

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo is twisting in the wind as more women come forward with stories about his alleged sexual harassment. But this crisis obscures something much more sinister: his policy decisions that undoubtedly cost lives.

As of March 7, there were five women accusing Cuomo of inappropriate touching and comments. This would exceed the limit that one political ally set for making it “time to resign.” Regardless of whether he leaves office of his own volition, Cuomo is also being investigated by New York Attorney General Leticia James about the allegations.

As part of a panel discussion on the Newsmax television program “Wake Up America,” Project 21 Co-Chairman Stacy Washington was asked to comment on Cuomo’s press conference statements, in which he apologized for his actions and said he “did not intend” to cause any harm to his female accusers.

Drawing from what she’s told her own children, Stacy said:

This, for me, is so simple… Keep your hands and lips and feet to yousel[f].

She noted that in an apparent act of political obfuscation, the media circus over the sexual harassment claims is overshadowing Cuomo’s involvement in the deadly decision to send elderly patients with COVID back into nursing homes, as well as the cover-up of the related spike in deaths among these patients:

He’d rather be talking about hugging and kissing people against their will than killing grandmas and grandpas – and that’s why he’s taking so much time to give these non-apology apologies.

As more facts become known, Cuomo’s fate may be sealed. But, Stacy warned, his fall from grace for either or both of these scandals may have created cover for other governors who acted with similar disregard for at-risk elderly citizens:

There are other… governors who have done the same thing that Cuomo did. They sent sick patients who were elderly back to nursing homes, and significant numbers of people died. So it Cuomo is the one that they sacrifice on the barbie, the other governors get off scot-free. And that’s the real story here.

Loading...
amy-blog

Founded by Amy Ridenour
(1959-2017)

Our Authors

The National Center for Public Policy Research is a communications and research foundation supportive of a strong national defense and dedicated to providing free market solutions to today’s public policy problems. We believe that the principles of a free market, individual liberty and personal responsibility provide the greatest hope for meeting the challenges facing America in the 21st century.