Colin Kaepernick, I support you

There is a phrase that my grandfather would say “You Reap What You Sow” It simply if you palnta seed or an idea it could sprout into something.

Well seems Al Mackey’s seeds are bearing some growth now. He and others have been saying for quite sometime now how racist anything connected to the Confederacy is. I am not denying racism at all, in fact I have said many times in many different places that racism existed under the United States flag also.

Now I don’t follow sports figures much, and this is the first time I am really aware of a sports figure protesting the national Anthem or the US flag. That being said I want everyone to know that Mackey’s attempt to spread hate by using racism as vehicle is working. Colin Kaepernick’s refusal to stand for the National Anthem and raising the flag, because of the treatment of people of color, is proof that Mackey’s message is getting across. Read one of many stories here. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/san-francisco-49ers-colin-kaepernick-refuses-stand-national-anthem/

Good Job Mackey.

One Cute Little Guy

Feel free to copy and forward.

untitled

A Media Double Standard

Look at this little guy. . .

Hello. Don’t recognize me? That’s OK; I Understand. My name was Antonio West. I was the child who was shot in the face at point blank range by two black teens, who were attempting to rob my mother, who was also shot.

I think my murder and my mommy’s wounding made the news for maybe a day, and then disappeared.

A Grand Jury of my mommy’s peers from Brunswick, Georgia ruled the black teens who murdered me will not face the death penalty… too bad it was me who got the death sentence from my killers instead, because Mommy didn’t have the money they demanded. See, my family made the mistake of being white in a 73% non-white neighborhood, but my murder wasn’t ruled a ‘hate crime’.

Oh, and President Obama didn’t take a single moment to acknowledge my murder. He couldn’t have any children who could possibly look like me – so why should he care?

I’m one of the youngest murder victims in our great Nation’s history, but the media didn’t care to cover the story of my being killed in cold blood.

There isn’t a white equivalent of Al Sharpton, because if there was he would be branded a ‘racist’. So no one’s rushing to Brunswick, Georgia to demonstrate and demand ‘justice’ for me. There’s no ‘White Panther’ party, either, to put a bounty on the lives of the two black teens who murdered me.

I have no voice, I have no representation, and unlike those who shot me in the face while I sat innocently in my stroller – I no longer have my life. Isn’t this a great country?

So while you’re out seeking ‘justice for Trayvon’ and Michael Brown, please remember to seek ‘justice’ for me.

Tell your friends about me, tell you families, get tee-shirts with my face on them, and make the world pay attention, just like you did for Trayvon. I won’t hold my breath, I don’t have to anymore.

Part II:

7/18- Jimmie Norman, white male murdered by black male.

No national news.

7/18- Terry Taylor, white male murdered by black male.

No national news.

7/17- Cindy Raygoza, white female murdered by black male.

No national news.

7/11- Luis Aguilar, 91 year old hispanic male murdered by

black male. No national news.

7/10- Brittany Simpson, white female murdered by black male.

No national news.

7/6- Sarah Goode, white female murdered by black male.

No national news.

7/6- Jeffrey Westerfield, white male murdered by black male.

No national news.

7/5- Perry Renn, white male murdered by black male.

No national news.

7/3- Laurey Kennedy, white female still in coma from beating

by black male. No national news.

7/3 Eric Mollet, white male murdered by black male.

No national news.

7/2 Rupert Anderson, white male murdered by black male.

No national news.

7/2 Jennifer Kingeter, white female murdered by black male.

No national news.

6/30 Jim Brennan, white male, murdered by black male.

No national news.

6/29 Paul Shephard, white male, murdered by black male.

No national news.

6/27 Shirley Barone, white female, murdered by black male.

No national news.

6/27 Penelope Spencer, white female, murdered by black male.

No national news.

6/27 Inga Evans, white female, murdered by black male.

No national news.

6/26 Jake Rameau, white male, murdered by black male.

No national news.

6/25 Gina Burger, white female, murdered by black male.

No national news.

6/24 Nathan Dasher, white male, murdered by black male.

No national news.

6/22 Jonathan Price, white male, murdered by black male.

No national news.

6/20 John Whitmore, white male, murdered by black male.

No national news.

6/18 John Yingling,white male, murdered by black male.

No national news.

6/17 Allyn Reeves, white male, murdered by black male.

No national news.

6/15 Michael Beaver, white male, murdered by black male.

No national news.

6/11 Angela Cook, white female, murdered by black male.

No national news.

6/11 Nathan Hall, white male, murdered by black male.

No national news.

6/7 Harry Briggs, white male, murdered by black male.

No national news.

6/5 Laura Bachman, white female, murdered by black male.

No national news.

6/2 Robert Mohler, white male, murdered by black male.

No national news.

6/1 William Headley, white male, murdered by black male.

No national news.

All this in just 48 days yet no national news. Want to know why?

Because this happens EVERY single day in America and we are used to it.

Yet a THUG getting shot by a Police Officer doing his job, 20 minutes after the THUG committed a robbery,makes national news! So why is this everyday phenomenal rate of blacks killing whites, not to mention the far worse rate at which blacks kill each other, generates riots or is addressed by black leaders as a problem within their community, but an occasional killing of a black by a white
police officer, a black who is usually doing something dangerously criminal, becomes a riot?

When the statistics speak we see that there is an epidemic of violence coming from within the black community that seriously endangers the remainder of the population.

So, where is the true injustice and tragedy?

We have a black president, a black attorney general and an irresponsible press committed to misleading the people of this country because it fits their liberal ‘politically correct’
agenda and it’s getting worse not better.

Think about it when you vote in November.

untitled

When ‘Taking Our Country Back’ Led to a Massacre

As usual Al Mackey has about half the facts need to present a true history of any event. This time he goes to a opinionated blog for his information instead of researching the vent on his own. Isn’t that what real “historians” do?

This time he is talking about the New Orleans Massacre of 1866. https://studycivilwar.wordpress.com/2016/08/10/when-taking-our-country-back-led-to-a-massacre/

You will notice his post is almost a copy and paste job of this website —- http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/07/30/when-taking-our-country-back-led-to-a-massacre.html

At any rate Mackey doesn’t say so, but he like to imply this is racism on the part of Southern men — ex-Confederates if you will. I remind you that in 1866 Andrew Johnson, a Unionist was president of the United States. The war was over and the Southern States were under control of the UNITED STATES military They were forcing their reconstruction policies on the South.

With that being said, Mackey’s blog post and the Daily Beast both imply that the harmless Blacks were doing nothing wrong when the awful white s attacked them and massacred SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THIS PARTY. IS THAT TRUE? Let’s take a look at a more historical website at http://www.blackwallstreet.freeservers.com/New%20orleans%20race%20riot%20of%201866.htm

Reading here we can plainly see there was friction between both parties> There is no real innocents involved. I am sure the atrocities committed by the Union troops– Sherman, Grant, Butler etc. were still fresh in the minds of these people. The fact the negroes were not peaceful didfd not help the situation

Office Unites States Military Telegraph, Hdqrs. War Department

The following telegram, received 2 p.m., July 28, 1866, from New Orleans, July 28, 1866.

PRESIDENT JOHNSON: Radical mass meeting composed mainly of large numbers of Negroes last night ending in a riot. The committee of Arrangements of said meeting assembling tonight, violent and incendiary speeches made, Negroes called to arm themselves. You bitterly denounced; speakers–Fiend, Dostie, Hawkins, Henderson, Heir, Ward, and others. Gov. Wells arrived last night, but sides with the Convention. Move the whole matter before Grand Jury, but impossible to execute civil process without certainty of riot. Contemplated to have the members of the Convention under process from the criminal court of this district. Is the military to interfere to prevent process of court?

ALBERT VOORHIES
………. Lieut. Gov. La.
………. ANDREW J. HERRON
………. Attorney-Gen. La.

[Telegram]
Executive Mansion
Washington, D.C., July 28, 1866.
TO ALBERT VOORHIES, Lieut.-Gov. of Louisiana.
New Orleans, La.

And Mackey that is the whole truth!!!!

Unfounded Fears of Slavery Expansion

“In the forefront of that group of issues which, for more than a decade before the secession of the cotton States, kept the Northern and Southern sections of the United States in irritating controversy and a growing sense of enmity, was the question of whether the federal government should permit and protect the expansion of slavery into the western territories . . . It was upon this particular issue that a new and powerful sectional party appeared in 1854, that the majority of the Secessionists of the cotton States predicated their action in 1860-1861, and it was upon this also that President-elect Lincoln forced the defeat of the compromise measures in the winter of 1860-61.

It seems safe to say that had this question been eliminated or settled amicably, there would have been no secession and no Civil War . . .

Disregarding the stock arguments – constitutional, economic, social and what-not – advanced by either group, let us examine afresh the real problem involved. Would slavery, if legally permitted to do so, have taken possession of the territories or of any considerable portion of them?

The causes of the expansion of slavery westward from the South Atlantic coast are now well-understood. The industrial revolution [in the North and in England] and the opening of world markets had continually increased the consumption and demand for raw cotton, while the abundance of fertile and cheap cotton lands in the Gulf States had steadily lured cotton farmers and planters westward. Where large-scale production was [possible, the enormous demand for a steady supply of labor had made the use of slaves inevitable, for a sufficient supply of free labor was unprocurable on the frontier . . . and slave labor was usually not profitable in growing grain.

This expansion of the institution was in response to economic stimuli . . . [and the] movement would go on as long as far as suitable cotton lands were to be found or as long as there was a reasonable expectation of profit from slave labor, provided, of course, that no political barrier was encountered.

But by 1849-50 . . . and by the time the new Republican party was formed to check the further expansion of slavery, the westward march of the cotton plantation was evidently slowing down. The only possibility of a further westward extension of the cotton belt was in Texas. In that alone was the frontier line of cotton and slavery still advancing . . .

In New Mexico and Arizona, Mexican labor is cheaper than Negro labor, as has always been the case since the acquisition of the region from Mexico. It was well-understood by sensible men, North and South, in 1850 that soil, climate, and native labor would form a perpetual bar to slavery in the vast territory then called New Mexico. [By 1860], ten years after the territory had been thrown open to slavery, showed not a single slave; and this was also true of Colorado and Nevada. Utah, alone of all these territories, was credited with any slaves at all . . . [and] the census of 1860 showed two slaves in Kansas and fifteen in Nebraska.

The Northern anti-slavery men held that a legal sanction of slavery in the territories would result in the extension of the institution and domination of the free North by the slave power; prospective immigrants in particular feared that they would never be able to get homes in this new West. Their fears were groundless; but in their excited state of mind they could see neither the facts clearly nor consider them calmly.

In the cold facts of the situation, there was no longer any basis for excited sectional controversy over slavery extension . . . [but] the public mind had so long been concerned with the debate that it could not see that the issue had ceased to have validity. In the existing state of the popular mind, therefore, there was still abundant opportunity for the politician to work to his own ends, to play upon prejudice and passion and fear.”

(The Causes of the Civil War, Kenneth M. Stampp, Prentice-Hall Inc., 1965, pp. 86-91)