Judging Racism Accurately

 We’ve all seen in the news recently that an unarmed seventeen year old African American was shot and killed.  People all across the country are screaming racist, when most don’t even have the details that are available, let alone the details that are impossible to ascertain for sure.  They don’t know that before the shooting, Zimmerman had called 911 to report Martin suspiciously following wandering the neighborhood, checking out the houses.  They don’t know that Zimmerman was the Neighborhood Watch Captain, and that their neighborhood had a few break ins lately.  They don’t know that Zimmerman claims that Martin attacked him.  They don’t know the police say that all available evidence is completely consistent with their story.  They don’t even know that Zimmerman was half Hispanic.  All they know is that Zimmerman has a Caucasian name, and that Martin was black.  They have no other details, and yet they are right there to crucify him.
                On the night in question, Zimmerman made a 911 call when he saw what he perceived to be suspicious behavior.  As the Neighbor Watch Captain, that was his job.  What he saw was someone in a hoodie following him, and watching him.  It seemed as though Martin was casing the neighborhood.  So he called 911.  The recording for this call is available at http://www.orlandosentinel.com/videogallery/68871920/News/George-Zimmerman-911-call-reporting-Trayvon-Martin.  The neighborhood had recently a few break ins, so the call was the right thing to do.  Zimmerman did at one point during this call quietly, and under his breath, utter a slur, which some speculated to be be “f***ing c***s”, but experts who have analyzed the recording believe it to have been “f***ing punks”.  It is very difficult to make out what he said either way, but I tend to go with the experts that know what they’re doing on this one.  After the call, Zimmerman claims that he lost track of Martin, and turned around to go home.  As he was doing so, Martin allegedly approached him from behind. “The two exchanged words, Zimmerman said, and Martin punched him, jumped on to of him, and began banging his head on a sidewalk.  Zimmerman said he began crying for help; Martin’s family things it was their son who was crying out.  Witness accounts differ, and emergency tapes in which the voices are heard are not clear.”
                Since the incident, so called “civil rights activists” have been calling for the arrest of Zimmerman, despite all evidence pointing to self-defense.  Some groups are inciting riots, and calling for his death.  Some groups are inciting riots, and calling for his death.  Spike Lee has published his address on Twitter, and urged his supporters to repost it.  Lee’s supporters have been inciting violence, and calling for his death.  This man is painted as a racist, and so are those that stand in his defense.  The New Black Panthers also call for his death, though this shouldn’t come as a surprise, as they are the most notoriously racist group in the country.  All of these people are calling out for the arrest of a man who has no clear evidence against him.  His only crime that we can know for sure is having a white father.  This is the definition of racism.  They want to condemn this man because of his race.  They know nothing else for sure, but because he has a white father, he must be guilty.
                If these people want to find racism, they only need to look into a mirror.  They’re recreating some of the atrocities during the pre-civil rights era.  At that time, if a black man was accused of rape or murder, he was immediately condemned for it.  These activists are right when they claim that these problems still exist today, but they themselves are the culprits.  I titled this post “Judging Racism Accurately”, because I intend to show just how to do this.  Racism is a hate for one race over another.  Treating one race as inherently good, and another as inherently bad.  Today’s society believe racism to be when a white man does something negative to a black man, or other minority, regardless of motivation.  Many still believe that an unfavorable opinion of the president is blatant racism.  Before you cry racist, you must actually analyze the situation. You must make sure that you have some real evidence that this is the case.  You can’t just go in looking for racism.  I call Spike Lee racist, because he has expressed his desire to go killing white people.  He actually says racist things.  He’s stated that he’s against interracial marriages.  He has stated that he hates white people.  I call the New Black Panthers racist because they publicly call for the deaths of white babies.  I call the Aryan Nations racist, because they call for the segregation, and the deaths of blacks.  I don’t call Zimmerman racist, because all we know is that he had an altercation with an African American that ended fatally.  We have no evidence that the motivation was racist.  There is speculation, but no actual evidence.  To accuse someone of racism is on the heaviest accusations there are, and this accusation should not be taken lightly.

***EDIT***


Having done additional research since my previous post, it became clear a great many more points were missed. I told you before that there was no evidence that Zimmerman was racially motivated.  Did you know that he also did volunteer work, which included tutoring neighborhood kids, many of whom were black?  Does this sound like a racist killer?

With our mainstream media the way it is, as well as special interest groups, and maggots like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, racism is searched for.  Aggressively. So aggressively, in fact, that three college lacrosse players were metaphorically hung after being accused of raping a black stripper.  A black stripper, who in the ended, was proven to have been lying.  The kids were painted as monsters, even though through the entire case, there was no evidence that this crime was committed.  Prosecutors even tried to dispute the reliability of DNA.  Everything pointed to her lying.  Unfortunately for them, she was black, and they were white, so they were therefore guilty in the eyes of the media.  So they painted them as monsters.  In the end, they were proven innocent.  These kids had mobs outside their homes.  Their pictures were posted all over campus calling them racist rapists.  They received countless death threats. All because of an irresponsible media jumping on race.  I myself received criticism in my own school for daring to point out the facts, and the unlikeliness that they were guilty.

In some of the 911 calls that were made by neighbors, there is a voice in the background screaming for help.  It is too unclear to determine for sure whether it was Martin screaming, or Zimmerman.  Martin's parents claim that it was Martin.  That's what they claim now, anyway.  His father originally told the lead detective that  it was not his son's voice.  He changed his story later.  An eyewitness even gave a detailed account, saying that he saw Martin on top of Zimmerman, pounding him.  There is no eyewitness claiming anything different.  Logic would suggest that to shoot a kid who has been screaming for a decent amount of time with no cause, surrounded by houses, would be a really stupid idea.  Not something likely to have been done by a Neighborhood Watch Captain, corrupt or not.  It makes no sense.  In the police report, Zimmerman's nose was bleeding, and his back was covered in grass stains.  Unless he broke his own nose, banged his own head against the sidewalk, and rubbed his back in the grass without being seen, it's pretty likely that this story is true.

Although this is not evidence to anything, it should be pointed out that no recent photos of Martin have been posted.  I thought myself that it didn't look like a 17 year old that could take down a 26 year old man.  It turns out that the reason for this is because these aren't pictures of a 17 year old that could take down a 26 year old man, but a 12 year old that grew into 6 foot tall, 160 pound 17 that most certainly could take down a 26 year old man, provided he had more experience in a fight than a 26 year old contributing member of society likely would.  Why is it that no recent photos have been provided?  Manipulation.  The mainstream media that has searched long and hard for any reason to stir up a tornado of racism at any cost only shows pictures that tug the heart strings.  How could this child be guilty of this?  I myself, as skeptical as I was, had difficulty looking at these photos.  This doesn't make him innocent.  After all, Hitler was probably a cute little toddler at one time.  Not to say that Trayvon Martin was comparable to Hitler in any way, I have no reason to think that.  But just because he was once a cute little 12 year old doesn't make him a victim.

The mainstream media has reported all of their unproven speculation as indisputable facts.  Even Bill O'Reilly doesn't seem to question that Zimmerman's original suspicion of Martin was racially motivated, despite the fact that we have absolutely no reason at all to believe that race was a factor.  At all.  It's speculation by people searching for racism like in a way that a broke Charlie Sheen might search his white carpet for cocaine.  So many times they were wrong, but it doesn't matter.  They keep on firing in hopes of hitting a guilty person.


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/03/27/police-zimmerman-story-is-consistent-with-evidence-in-trayvon-martin-shooting/

My Right vs. Your Rights

                As a small government conservative, few things are more important than protecting the God given rights of all people.  However, in today’s society, the term “God given rights” has been severely stretched.  Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the right to personal property, the pursuit of happiness; these things are all God given rights.  You’re permitted to say what you want, so long as it does not incite violence.  You’re permitted to worship how you want, so long as it does not violate the law.  These things are your God given rights because they take nothing away from the rights of others.  But there are some things today that are mislabeled as rights that infringe on the rights of others.

                The right to choice, concerning abortion; this is not a right, because it infringes on the rights of others.  It infringes on the child’s right to life.  If not for that, true conservatives would be in full support, but it’s not really the woman’s body in question here.  Except in a few cases of rape, that child is there because of the choice that the mother made.  The father made the same choice, but as of today, science has yet to come up with a way to split the responsibility between the two.  The child didn’t decided to infringe on the woman.  The woman decided to have sex, likely unprotected, and then became pregnant.  Our actions have consequences.  I wouldn’t force a woman to raise the child, but that’s where adoption agencies step in.  It’s arguable that the institutions that parentless children have to go through are inefficient, but what isn’t arguable is that death is always a worse choice.

                The right to free healthcare; this also infringes on the rights of others.  This particular post will not debate the effect that socialized health care has on the health care system, just whether or not it’s right.  I’ll save that for a later blog.  What I want to deal with here is right itself.  It’s not a God given right, because it forces someone else to pay for it.  Healthcare is expensive no matter how you go about it.  It’s just a matter of whether you pay for it yourself, or the unwilling taxpayer.  You most certainly have the right to health care through hard work, and prioritizing.  If you have frivolous spending in your budget (You probably do, since most of this country does), than you can afford healthcare.  Healthcare is a product, and it’s your responsibility, not the responsibility of those that were more careful with their money.  You have the right to your own property, as they have a right to yours.  They don’t owe you just because they are better off than you.

                The right to a job; this suggests that regardless of your work ethic, that society owes you a job.  This isn’t the case.  You have the right to seek a job, the right to earn a job, and the right to have the job that you earned, but employers have the right to hire as much or as little as they choose, and they have the right to not hire those that they choose not to.  If you have a right to a job, then that means if you’re the type of person to show up late and hung over on a daily basis, and spends most of the day pretending to work, and accomplishing nothing.  This person has no right to a job.  He does, however, have the right to redeem himself.  He has the right to get an alarm clock, the right to stop drinking on weekends, and the right to be a hard worker.  Then he’ll have earned the privilege of a job.  Some more work, and he just might earn the privilege of a promotion, or a better job.   The right to be a decent employee doesn’t infringe on the rights of others.  In fact, it actually does some good for others.  The right to a job forces someone who may or may not want you to hire you. 

                God given rights do not infringe on the rights of others.  They do not force you to provide goods and services for others.  They don’t take your rights away.  Society extends past you.  You need to take others into consideration.  A mindset that believes that the world somehow owes you something is a delusion.  Meth addicts have this mind view.  It’s considered anti-social behavior.  Your God given rights only include those that don’t infringe on the rights of others.

The Truth about U.S. Oil Consumption

"America uses more than twenty percent of the world's oil. If we drilled every square inch of this country, we would still have only two percent of the world's known oil reserves."  - Barack Hussein Obama

The above quote is loaded with flaws, and blatant, insulting deception.  These two figures are unrelated, and skewed to begin with.  This is a president that is counting on you being stupid enough to not see through his words, but with a little bit of thought, it's clearly just smoke and mirrors used to manipulate you into enacting his agenda,which is a 100% green economy at ANY cost.  He's trying to make it appear as though we have no options left, that we're out of time.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  I'm not saying that green energy wouldn't be a good thing, but it's not ready yet.  To lie to people to convince them that all sacrifices must be made just to have it done today because we have no other choice is wrong.  This statement, though technically using real figures, is nothing but pure deception.

Let's start with the 2% possession to 20% consumption comparison.  These numbers are unrelated.  It makes no sense to compare them.  To explain it, I will be borrowing an excerpt from pjmedia.com.  There's a link to the actually page immediately following this post.  Imagine that the world's total oil reserves amounts to 100,000.  If the U.S. held 2% of those reserves, that would be a volume of 2,000.  If the yearly global production was a volume of 100, and the oil consumption of the U.S. was 20%, that would mean that the U.S. would consume 20.  If no further oil exploration were conducted, then that would mean that the U.S. could go on consuming 20% for a hundred years.  The numbers are unrelated.  20% of annual global oil production as compared to the percentage of proven oil fields within the U.S. are unrelated.  It's apples and oranges.

On top of that, this 2% figure is skewed.  It only refers to the oil fields that have been without a doubt proven.  The amount of oil that's actually been discovered, proving that it not only exists, but where it is, and how much of it there is.  If you had a coal mine, and you the value of this mine was measured by the amount of coal it was known to contain, it would be an amount far less than it actually contained.  This is because you can really only speculate how much coal there really is.  With today's technology, this speculation can be extremely accurate, but with the above method of appraisal, speculation doesn't affect it's value.  Only the proven amount.  This is the method that Obama is using.  The U.S.  has 22.3 billion proven barrels of oil.  That's where the 2% comes from.  However, it is believed that there is at least 86 billion barrels of oil in the outer continental shelf, 24 billion barrels in the lower 48 states, 2 billion barrels in Alaska's north slope, 12 billion barrels in ANWR, and 19 billion barrels in the Utah Tar Sands.  Already, that is over six times more than the number that the 2% figure represents.  But that's not all.  According to the USGS, the Green River Formation is Wyoming contains a whopping 1.4 trillion barrels of oil.  That's 1.4 trillion, not 1.4 billion.  If you ignored the rest of the country's oil, and only counted the shale oil found here, it's equal to 62 times the original 2% figure. This is incredibly deceptive.   

Seeing as how this same president has blocked such a great amount of oil exploration, it prevents this number from ever growing.  Though he now claims he does everything he can to expand drilling, in reality, he's made it a top priority to prevent further drilling, and the grounds of environmentalism.  With a drilling policy like this, of course we only have 2% of the world's proven oil fields.  He won't allow any more than that.  That's not the amount we hold, it's the amount we've been allowed to discover.  The 2% figure only refers to the oil currently being drilled.  This is where the above quote is more than just distortion, but a lie.  We wouldn't need to drill every square inch to lead the world in oil production.  If we were to maximize oil production, that number would cease to be 2%.

Mr. President, we aren't stupid.  You may have some of the people brain washed into worshiping you as their savior, but the rest aren't buying it.  I will do everything in my power, as will many of my peers, to shine a  light on this deception that you present.  You may have the mainstream media eating out of your hand, but you can't control the internet.

P.S.  It should be included that during Obama's campaign, he claimed  that the U.S. had 3% of it's reserves, then only recently dropped it down to 2%.  Likely due to people having been stretched to their limits, and therefore needing to cut it even shorter in order to sell it.

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/03/16/obama-us-uses-20-of-oil-only-has-2-of-reserves/ 

http://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Why-is-Obama-Lying-About-US-Oil-Reserves.html 

An All of the Above Energy Solution - Including Gas

Our commander in chief has stated that we need more than a temporary solution to our energy crisis. That we need an "all of the above" solution.  That we need more than just oil, but also wind, solar, and bio fuels as well.  Unfortunately, with today's technology, the only ones that are truly viable are natural gas and oil, both of which he seems to intentionally avoid, while wasting billions of dollars and solar power projects that we already knew weren't ready.

Wind power is should only be considered profitable by the wind farmers themselves.  This is due to the fact that they often receive more in subsidies then receive from the actual energy sales themselves.  What this means in short is that you, the tax payer, is paying a large, unknown amount for wind energy.  Without large government subsidies, wind farms across the country would be shut down.

Bio-fuels are nowhere near ready either.  The absolute best projection out there would take an algae farm roughly the size of Maryland.   To use corn, it would take a farm the size of nearly a quarter of the entire country just to make a dent.  Maybe in the future, we can come up with a way to make this more efficient, but it seems to me that it's not really worth bothering with at this point.

Next is Solar Power.  I admit, Solar Power is the future of our energy, and it's not that far off.  One day soon, it may very well replace both oil and natural gas.  Today, it's not the case.  Though experts predict that in 2020, solar panels can be compacted into square inches, it's not plausible today.  I think Solyndra is proof of that.  Even with over half a billion dollars of the tax payers money, they tanked.  It's just not profitable, therefore inefficient. One day it will be, but to cram it through today, finished or not, is simply a waste of money.  We already knew it wasn't ready.  The Bush administration turned the same opportunity down because after looking into it, it was clear it wasn't ready.  The Obama administration did no investigating, they just took campaign contributions.

Lastly, we have oil.  The claim is that there is a shortage, but this is just untrue.  Our very own home is rich with it.  However, we refuse to drill, even in this present energy crisis.  The above alternative fuels currently contribute to one percent of energy.  That's all.  Like it or not, it's currently our only real source of energy.  And it's right here.  By allowing more drilling, we could virtually eliminate our dependence on foreign oil.

I'm all for an "all of the above" energy policy, but it needs to be done responsibly.  We need to determine the viability of these alternative energies, and decide what to devote to each one.  The only truly viable source of energy is oil.  Solar Power is on it's way, but until it's actually ready, it can't be depended upon.  This obsession with having alternative energy immediately is irresponsible, and reckless.  If you truly want to see solar power thrive, our economy first needs to thrive.  To do that, we need to take the solution that actually works.  That solution is oil.  It's dirty, but it's cheap and plentiful, so long as we actually drill for it.  Removing the pressure on our economy will speed the process up.  Ironically, the best thing environmentally is oil.