Wintery Knight

…integrating Christian faith and knowledge in the public square

Democrats in California want to pass laws to penalize Asians

Basically, the Democrats in California want to pass an affirmative action bill, which would penalize overachievers. Asians tend to outperform other races in academics, so they are always the losers when academic criteria are minimized in favor of racial criteria for college admissions.

Here’s an article from National Review, sent to me by Letitia.

Excerpt:

The California state legislature was on the verge of approving a referendum to restore the consideration of race and ethnicity in admissions to state universities.

[...]What both sides of the bimodal Asian immigration population have in common is that their children do uncommonly well in school. They are represented in California’s much-admired universities in far larger numbers than their share of the population would suggest: Asians compose 14 percent of California’s population but 37 percent of the undergraduates at its state universities. They make up about 40 percent of the students at UCLA, 43 percent of the students at Berkeley, half the students at UC San Diego, and more than half of the students at UC Irvine. A relatively small minority, they compose the largest single ethnic group on California university campuses (at least as California defines “ethnic group”).

[...]Liberals talk a great deal of mindless rot about what they like to call “privilege,” the supposedly omnipresent advantages that accrue to the white, the male, the heterosexual, those whose sense of self is more or less congruent with their biological genitals, etc. But it is worth keeping in mind that progressive social-engineering programs such as the use of racial criteria in university admissions do not hurt only hurt well-off white people sporting penises. (Not that we should shortchange the interests of well-off white penis-sporters.) They also hurt poor people and immigrants, in this case a group of immigrants that we as a country should count ourselves lucky to have. It is important to remember why race-based admissions are such an important issue for progressives: The Left lives in the public schools, which do a terrible job of teaching black, Hispanic, and poor students, who consequently show up in embarrassingly small proportions at elite institutions. Asian students, on the other hand, do a tremendous amount of work outside of school, spending ten times as much time as non-Asian students do on organized non-school activities ranging from music lessons to tutoring to test-preparation courses. That is true across the economic spectrum: Working-class Asian immigrant families in Queens send their children to tutoring sessions and piano lessons at a much higher rate than does the non-Asian population, even though the relative financial sacrifices necessary for them to do so are heavy.

For that, California’s professional race hustlers, and their allies across the country, would see them punished.

So, here is another case where the party that talks a lot about racism and race is actually the one that is opposed to Asians getting ahead. My view is that if Asians have the strong families that produce high achievers, then let them be 40% of the students at the university. Maybe then people of other races will get the message that they need to focus more on raising children who can compete. Follow the rules and you won’t be poor: finish high school, get jobs, get married, have children, don’t get divorced. If you follow those rules, you will not be poor, and your children will outperform you.

Filed under: News, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

How to increase the number of adoptions in America

Here’s an article from National Review that argues that there is far more demand for children to adopt than there is supply of children to adopt for certain specific reasons.

The article mentions how legalized abortion and pro-eugenic attitudes contribute to diminishing the supply of children via abortion, but then it discusses another reason for reduced supply which I found horrifying. Apparently leftist social workers think that it is a bad idea for white parents to adopt black children, and would prefer those black children grow up in foster care.

Look:

Most of the parents waiting to adopt are white; most of the children awaiting adoption are not. Parents’ attitudes toward transracial adoption have become much more liberal since the 1970s, but the racial attitudes of social workers, those sometimes pitiless gatekeepers on the adoption pilgrimage, have hardened. A study published by the academic journal Child Welfare found that 43 percent of the caseworkers responsible for the longest-waiting black children in New York State expressed hostility toward transracial adoption. Federal law prohibits the use of racial criteria in adoption placement, but ethnic considerations have seeped into the system: The number of transracial adoptions executed each year remains tiny despite the willingness of the majority of couples to adopt a child of a different race. About 8 percent of all adoptions are transracial or cross-cultural — and that number includes international adoptions, commonly from Asia and South America. Professor Judy Fenster of Adelphi University finds that black social workers are particularly inimical to the prospect of cross-racial adoption. It seems that the matchmakers at the heart of the adoption system are part of the problem.

Transracial adoption is a volcanically touchy issue — the National Association of Black Social Workers has deployed weapons-grade rhetoric characterizing the practice as “cultural genocide.” That ideology has had predictable consequences: Black children spend more time in foster care than others, and in general have less luck in finding permanent adoptive homes. The Multi-Ethnic Placement Act of 1994, a legacy of the late senator Howard Metzenbaum, forbade the use of race as the decisive factor in making adoption-placement decisions, but the language of the statute left those politically opposed to transracial adoptions with room for much mischievous maneuvering. Would-be adoptive parents were disqualified for expressing political opinions at odds with social workers’ preferences.

[...]In one case, a white couple who had hoped to adopt a severely disabled black girl in 1994 were disqualified on political grounds — specifically that they expressed a desire to raise their children to be “colorblind” — and on racial grounds, specifically that they lived in Alaska, which was judged to be superabundantly Caucasian. The couple had raised other severely disabled children of various ethnic backgrounds but they were rejected in favor of a single woman who expressed the “correct” racial attitudes — and who ended up declining to adopt the child, precisely because of her disabilities. The girl in question suffered from Fetal Alcohol Syndrome and from Russell-Silver Syndrome, a form of dwarfism associated with, among other things, gastrointestinal difficulties, a triangular face, and asymmetrical body growth. It is difficult to imagine that her most pressing challenge in life was going to be the relative scarcity of black neighbors in Fairbanks.

So, it’s very important to think about the rhetoric of the left on children’s rights and welfare. On the one hand, they talk about wanting to help children. On the other hand, the policies they embrace seem to promote child murder, child abuse, child neglect and child poverty. On the one hand, the secular left is very much in favor of killing children with abortion, or depriving them of fathers with single mother welfare, or depriving them of bio-moms or bio-dads with gay marriage. On the other hand, they are actually working against letting these children be adopted, so much that American parents have to go to other countries to find children to adopt. And even that process is very difficult.

When will we get to the point where we can look at leftists and just flat out say that although they might have good intentions, their policies don’t achieve good results. Maybe a little more compassion for children is needed.

Filed under: News, , , , , , , , ,

The real story in the Trayvon Martin George Zimmerman trial is media bias

Here’s an excellent article by John Nolte on Breitbart that documents the mainstream media’s efforts to make a crisis out of an open-and-shut case of self-defense.

Here are a few of the distortions from the mainstream media: (links removed)

March 21, 2012 – CNN Falsely Accuses Zimmerman of Saying “#censoredByWK#”

Knowing full well the phony racial storm brewing around the Zimmerman case was about to have gasoline thrown on it the next day, CNN went to extraordinary lengths to claim Zimmerman had uttered the racial slur “#censoredByWK#” when he had not.

This has to be watched to be believed.

CNN wouldn’t officially retract their defamation until April 5th, long after it was too late.

March 27, 2012 – NBC News Edits 911 Audio to Make Zimmerman Look Racist

On the storied Today Show, NBC News told America Zimmerman said this on the 911 call:

ZIMMERMAN: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.

When the truth is that the unedited audio actually went like this:

ZIMMERMAN: This guy looks like he’s up to no good, or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.

DISPATCHER: Okay. And this guy, is he white, black, or Hispanic?

ZIMMERMAN: He looks black.

After the fraudulent editing was discovered by the New Media (first by Breitbart News), former NBC News president Steve Capus would claim that the edit was “a mistake and not a deliberate act to misrepresent the phone call.”

Eventually, several NBC producers would be fired (without being named), and Zimmerman would file a lawsuit against NBC; it remains unresolved.

March 28, 2012 – ABC News Falsely Claims Zimmerman Wasn’t Injured Night of Shooting

The day after NBC News released its falsified 911 bombshell, ABC News released a phony, hyped-up story of its own. Using grainy surveillance video of Zimmerman at the police station on the night of the shooting, ABC News claimed, “A police surveillance video taken the night that Trayvon Martin was shot dead shows no blood or bruises on George Zimmerman.”

Obviously, if true, this would go a long way towards proving Zimmerman was not in fear of his life the night of the shooting and had lied about being beaten up.

The only problem is that the ABC News story was not true — not even close. The network didn’t bother to enhance the video before breaking the news. Had they, Zimmerman’sbloody head would have been quite apparent.

It would take four days for ABC to retract its falsehood.

Now just compare the biased coverage of the Zimmerman case with the non-coverage of the Gosnell case, where a black abortionist was murdering unborn and born children left, right and center for years.

As John Lott argued, there should not even have been a trial:

The case was so weak that the local Sanford District Attorney refused to bring charges against Zimmerman. That is why, on the orders of the governor, an outside District Attorney, Angela Corey, had to be brought in to handle it.

Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee was fired because he also refused to charge Zimmerman with a crime.

Even the lead detective on the case, Christopher Serino, told the jury he believed Zimmerman’s version of the events.

If the media was really concerned about violence against blacks, then they would be concerned about black-on-black violence.

Look at this article from the leftist UK  Guardian.

Excerpt:

Startling statistics reveal that between 1980-2008, African-Americans were six times more likely than whites to be victims of gun violence and seven times more likely to kill with guns than whites, according to the Justice Department. African-Americans represent a mere 13% of the US population yet more than 50% of federal prisoners are black. You can claim racial bias in the judicial system, but that doesn’t explain all of it.

Why aren’t so-called black leaders outraged and marching over the recent shooting rampage in Chicago. During the 4 July holiday weekend, including the Wednesday leading up to it, 62 people were wounded by gun violence in Chicago and 12 others killed. The holiday shooting spree raised Chicago’s homicide tally to 200 for the year. Last year about 500 people were killed, and most of those killing and being killed in Chicago are black. According to the Chicago Tribune, “blacks make up about 33% of the city’s population, they accounted for nearly 78% of the homicide victims through the first six months of 2012″.

With the mainstream media’s national attention on the Zimmerman murder trail, I think it’s stunning that scant, if any, attention was given to the violence raging in Chicago or other cities across the country. As I’ve said many times during this case, Americans, especially black Americans, have come to accept blacks killing other blacks as normal.

Why does the mainstream media have nothing to say about that? Why does the black community have nothing to say about that? The real cause of violent crime is fatherlessness, but the left is in favor of promoting and subsidizing fatherlessness, so they’re not going to say a word against it. Single mothers are one of the left’s main constituencies come election time. It’s disgusting that they want to prop up single mothers who make poor choices with men. Not to mention protecting the failed public school system and attacking vouchers that would help black children out of poverty. And not to mention the epidemic of abortion in the black community. Children deserve better than abortion, public schools and fatherlessness. But to help children, we have to start being honest about the causes of their real problems.

By the way, I have to point out that I am not white. I have brown skin. I have darker skin that Barack Obama. But unlike the mainstream media, when I see evil, I call it evil, regardless of people’s skin color. The mainstream media is not interested in telling the truth. They are interested in creating divisions based on skin color. They are the real racists. They are the real destroyers.

This was nothing but a circus of media bias. See this related post for academic studies that document left-wing media bias.

Filed under: News, , , , , , , , , , , ,

State Attorney Angela Corey fires whistleblower in Trayvon Martin case

Story from the Florida Times-Union. (H/T Bad Blue)

State Attorney Angela Corey fired her office’s information technology director Friday after he testified last month about being concerned prosecutors did not turn over information to George Zimmerman’s defense team in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin.

On the same day attorneys finished their closing arguments in that nationally watched trial, a state attorney investigator went to Ben Kruidbos’ home about 7:30 a.m. to hand-deliver a letter stating Kruidbos “can never again be trusted to step foot in this office.”

The letter contended Kruibos did a poor job overseeing the information technology department, violated public records law for retaining documents, and noted he was questioned in March when the office was trying to determine who had leaked personnel information obtained through a computer breach.

In an interview Friday, Kruidbos denied the allegations in the letter, which was written by Cheryl Peek, the managing director of the State Attorney’s Office.

He said he had acted in good faith about “genuine concerns.” He said he had been proud to work at the State Attorney’s Office and feared the letter would cripple his chances at finding another job to support his family, including a 4-month-old son.

“I don’t have any regrets,” he said, “but I am terrified about the future and what that will end up being.”

His attorney Wesley White — who resigned from the State Attorney’s Office in December and is a critic of Corey — said the firing was aimed at sending a message to office employees “that if they feel like there is wrongdoing,” they should not disclose it or seek legal guidance from a private attorney.

“If they do speak to an attorney, then they are dead,” he said. “The State Attorney’s Office will do whatever is necessary to not only terminate them, but destroy their reputations in the process.”

Jackelyn Barnard, spokeswoman for Corey and the State Attorney’s Office, did not return phone calls or emails for comment.

This is why I have to move to a very red state. I don’t want to deal with a bunch of leftists who don’t know right from wrong. I don’t want to be prosecuted by people who have no respect for the law, and are just looking to push a political agenda.

Filed under: News, , , , , , , , , , ,

FOIA documents reveal that Holder DOJ facilitated anti-Zimmerman protests

From the Washington Times. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

The legal watchdog Judicial Watch announced today that it has obtained documents revealing the Community Relations Service (CRS), a unit of the Department of Justice, was deployed to Sanford, Fla., following the death of Trayvon Martin to help organize rallies against George Zimmerman.

[...]According to the report, employees of the DOJ’s CRS are required by law to “conduct their activities in confidence. Though the agency claims to use “impartial mediation practices and conflict resolution procedures,” press reports suggest that the unit deployed to Sanford took an active role in mobilizing against Mr. Zimmerman.

“These documents detail the extraordinary intervention by the Justice Department in the pressure campaign leading to the prosecution of George Zimmerman,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “My guess is that most Americans would rightly object to taxpayers paying government employees to help organize racially-charged demonstrations.”

Fox News had some more on the story.

Excerpt:

Judicial Watch, in claiming the agency crossed a line by aiding the anti-Zimmerman events, points to an April 2012 article in the Orlando Sentinel.

That article detailed the role the CRS unit played during the protests. In one case, the Sentinel said they helped “set up a meeting between the local NAACP and elected officials that led to the temporary resignation of police Chief Bill Lee.”

In another, the article said they arranged an escort for college students for a 40-mile march to “demand justice.”

Is that the proper role of government? They are going after a private individual with taxpayer money. That is nothing but tyranny.

Filed under: News, , , , , , , , , , ,

Wintery Tweets

Click to see recent visitors

  Visitors Online Now

Page views since 1/30/09

  • 3,956,405 hits

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,746 other followers

Archives

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,746 other followers

%d bloggers like this: