SONICFROG DOT NET

A Facebook friend recommended I listen to a recent Hugh Hewitt podcast, on which both Marco Rubio and famed Conservative laywyer Andrew McCarthy react to the indictment of Trump by special counsel Jack Smith in the stolen documents case.

Now that I’ve had a chance to listen to the Hewitt interview….

First: Marco Rubio. He doesn’t bring any real insight to the table here. And, on a sidebar… Has Marco Rubio never heard of what has gone on during “Crossing The Line” ceremonies? My Dad, who was a merchant marine working for the Navy, showed some pics of some of the things that went on during the celebration for those crossing the equator for the first time. The pics he showed us were pretty raunchy, and he made it clear there were things he was nOT gonna show his kids. I’m quite sure some of my friend who were in the military have stories.

Second: McCarthy was totally playing defense lawyer here. He left out a few crucial details when comparing Trumps document situation. It’s lying by omission:

The concept of “spillage”. McCarthy doesn’t mention it.

Those in the highest positions of power, President, VP, heads of cabinet positions, are always on duty. They are never really done for the day as it were (which is why I don’t get worked up over golf trips or whatever – they never have time off). They take their work with them. Though they are required to keep track of all paperwork, things do get separated.

Spillage.

Typically it’s less sensitive docs, docs that contain some classified material, but are not in folders marked TOP SECRET or similar docs. From what I’ve gathered both the Pence and Biden classified materials were of that nature.

But, they did have the doc, which is against the law….

Which brings us to the next omission:

The Presidential Records Act. Both McCarthy and Hewitt mention it, but they don’t ever give the explanation of the law:

*Establishes public ownership of all Presidential records and defines the term Presidential records.

*Requires that Vice-Presidential records be treated in the same way as Presidential records.

*Places the responsibility for the custody and management of incumbent Presidential records with the President.

*Requires that the President and his staff take all practical steps to file personal records separately from Presidential records.

*Allows the incumbent President to dispose of records that no longer have administrative, historical, informational, or evidentiary value, once the views of the Archivist of the United States on the proposed disposal have been obtained in writing.

*Establishes in law that any incumbent Presidential records (whether textual or electronic) held on courtesy storage by the Archivist remain in the exclusive legal custody of the President and that any request or order for access to such records must be made to the President, not NARA.

*Establishes that Presidential records automatically transfer into the legal custody of the Archivist as soon as the President leaves office.

*Establishes a process by which the President may restrict and the public may obtain access to these records after the President leaves office; specifically, the PRA allows for public access to Presidential records through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) beginning five years after the end of the Administration, but allows the President to invoke as many as six specific restrictions to public access for up to twelve years.

Codifies the process by which former and incumbent Presidents conduct reviews for executive privilege prior to public release of records by NARA (which had formerly been governed by Executive order 13489).

Whenever a Trump defender brings up the “what about _______, he / she didn’t get charged, there is a reason why. For both Pence and Hillary, it is clear they followed the proper procedure at the end of their respective tenure in office; it can be demonstrated they did things by the book as much as possible….

But some spillage did occur in both instances. The law, as enforced, gives some leeway for spillage, which is why, at the end of the day, the Trump Dept of Justice under both Jeff Sessions and Bill Barr did not prosecute Hillary. If you recall, when the Republican Congress was investigating Hillary, they got access to 60,000 emails from the State Department. She followed procedure. The 30,000 that got deleted had been approved by State as being personal email, which is allowed to be retained by according to law. The FBI recovered the emails, and found only a few to have any classified material…

Again… spillage.

In this regard, Comey, for all his faults, was correct, the DoJ would have lost the case.

**Note: I haven’t mentioned Biden because that case is still under investigation.**

Here’s the most interesting omission that makes the case for everything I’ve typed above. Jack Smith is prosecuting former President Trump for a lot of things, BUT, not among them are the first batch of documents the former President turned in a year after the DoJ and NARA notified them that a lot of national defense documents were not accounted for.

If Donald Trump would have given everything he had back, and demonstrated good faith in the endeavor, he would, like Pence and Hillary, not have been charge. The reason he got indicted is because, unlike Pence and Hillary he showed intent to keep the documents and continued to actively flout the law, the DoJ, FBI, and NARA.

So yeah. McCarthy is an excellent lawyer… And he’s doing a ton of lawyering here on behalf of team Trump. But Trump is NOT being charge with violating the Presidential Record Act, which he knows. So yeah, he’s lying by omission.

PS: One of the reasons I stopped listening to most Conservative media is because they thrive on lying by omission. Rush was a master at it. I also don’t listen to a lot of liberal media either for the same reason. But on a scale of 1 to 10, conservative media has always been much worse… Like… $787 million dollars worse.

——————————-

How did I do Rich Merritt????

Way back when, when I was blogging full time, I did quite a bit of discussion about legal stuff; Supreme Court decisions, stuff like that. As I drifted away from blogging – blame facebook – and I got busy with career and the like, I stopped following law as much.

Something that is happening recently is pulling me back into that game.

It’s important enough that I’m going to create a new tag for it : Trump Legal.

Posts coming soon.

Jack Shafer at Politico is telling us to be OK with what happened at CNN last night. It was CNN trying to be more of a news network instead of just another opinion / editorial service:

“…having signaled that it wants to restore news to primacy, an interview with Trump was a good idea…”

Except… Trump lying is not news. It’s propaganda, pure and simple. And CNN is now as complicit as FOX in helping to spread it.

“But the job of journalism is to confront the world and its actors as they are, not shrink away from them in fright because covering them might benefit them.”

That wasn’t “confrontation”. Confrontation is stating, flat out “you’re lying, and I’m not going to let you continue if you’re not going to be truthful”. Or something. Collins got rolled like everyone else because the play by the rules, and Trump doesn’t. It’s like the Greek armies facing the Romans. The Greeks would line up in the standard phalanx formation, while the Romans implemented a new strategy, the maniple formation, which neutralized the phalanx. Instead of changing and adapting, the Greeks continued to rely on the phalanx. Since 2015, it’s been quite obvious that the press, or more specifically, broadcast journalists, when using the typical interview standard set long ago, and most effectively used by Edward R Murrow, simply doesn’t work. Shafer even admits:

“Nobody practiced in the art of the interview has ever been able to stop this lying chatterbox in a live session. As scholar Michael Socolow points out, Chris Wallace, Lesley Stahl and Jonathan Swan successfully tamed him, but all of those Trump interviewers were taped and edited, which neutered his predictable and exuberant filibustering. Plus, those interviews were conducted without an audience. Trump’s CNN town hall, on the other hand, was stocked from stem to stern with cheering acolytes who rewarded his every insult and evasion with laughter and applause. It’s hard to conduct an interview when rotten fruit and vegetables are being hurled onto the stage”.

So why do it???

We are in a war for not just truth, but accuracy. Every time Trump is allowed to go on air, those things are destroyed under the weight of his cult status. It doesn’t matter if the ratings were lower than his normal FOX ”News” interviews. It doesn’t matter if Biden’s town hall had higher ratings than this Trump one. Trump is a lying sick sociopath once again running for office. But he’s dynamic, and once again has played the press like fools. And worse, CNN didn’t just interview Trump, they went out of the way to fill the Town Hall with Trump cult members, giving him a cheering squad, which is NOT what you do if you’re trying to “restore news to primacy”.

This turned into a campaign rally.

If you don’t think so, look at the propaganda below that I grabbed from the page of a conservative friend.

Sometimes, to quote the movie War Games, the best way to win is not to play.

Ruben Navarrette bait.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/05/11/trump-cnn-town-hall-reaction-column-00096507

I’ve recently been in a discussion with someone online about whether or not we can handle being a gun-worshiping society. Here’s how it went. I start with:

—————————————————–

Our.

Society.

Can’t.

Handle.

Guns.

Before you say “I have a gun and I would never ____________”. I could own a flamethrower and would never ______________. Doesn’t mean I should own one.

It’s not about “you”. It’s about us. US!!! Our society. Our culture. Since the late 1970s, thanks to the leadership coup of the NRA, the mainstream message of gun ownership shifted from gun safety to the 2nd amendment focus, things have gone astray.

Why?

Because the focus on 2nd amendment was coupled with both the paranoia that the guvment is gonna take all our guns away!!! And that owning a gun will “keep us safe”. And then you have the glorification of vigilante justice in our culture… This is how we got here.

We should no longer be able to own guns. I would not have said that 15 years ago, but it’s the reality of our society today. Realistically, we need to at the very least have much more restrictive gun ownership.

But then the guvment….

What. You think your guns are gonna protect you for the government??? For my entire life and beyond, you have voted for the person who promised to spend more on the military to “keep our nation strong!!!”. YOU DID!!! But you want to have a gun to try and fight a government that YOU armed to the teeth. 800 billion per year and climbing.

You gave them drones for crying out loud. If you decide you’re really gonna fight the guvment, they’ll take you out before you see it coming.

Having more and more guns obviously does NOT make our society safer. And no, I’m not “anti-gun”. I don’t come to this conclusion lightly. Just like flamethrowers, our society can’t handle the responsibility of gun ownership.

---

A friend who disagrees responds:

———————————————–

Agree to Disagree Mike…There are 5x more deaths by knives in the U.S. yearly than by Rifles…and yet NOBODY is trying to band knives or your right to buy and carry one. You do not have to register your knife, nor do you have to wait 10 days or pass a background check in order to buy one. You do not have to take a certified safety course or pass a written test to buy one. You do not have to be over 21 or show I.D. to buy one.

The truth is there is a 0.000102566410256% chance of death by firearm in the U.S. if you take suicides and gang related shootings out of the mix there is a 0.000008564102564% chance of death by firearm in the U.S.

The U.S. has the HIGHEST rate of gun ownership in the entire world and yet we rank 28th in gun related violence.

Handguns are responsible for over 80% of all mass shootings…Not AR-15 style rifles

Gun ownership has increased by 56% since 1993 and yet gun violence decreased by nearly half

Since 1950 almost ALL mass shootings have occurred in GUN FREE zones

the states that have banned open carry experience much higher rates of police deaths than states the approve open carry

People who have concealed carry permits on average commit less crime than law enforcement officers

1.35 million people die each year in an automobile (That is 3700 a day) and yet NOBODY is trying to band cars and trucks

More people die from the flu than by gun in the U.S. each year…

10x times as many people died from being overweight last year in the U.S. than by firearm…but nobody is trying to ban spoons and forks

More people die from Blunt Force Trauma in the U.S. each year than by firearm and yet nobody has to wait 10 days and pass a background check to buy a baseball bat

There are almost 400 million guns in the U.S with trillions of rounds of ammunition in circulation and yet less than 1/10 of 1% of Americans die by firearm each year…you honestly stand a better chance of being struck by lightning…

Gun violence is NOT and epidemic in the U.S. you are being misled and flat out lied to by the Media and liberal politicians and people who want to see America disarmed and brought to it’s knees

the are between 11.5 and 16 million registered Hunters in the U.S. in comparison the Chinese Military (the largest in the world) has just under 3 million…

Certain private individuals and elements in the U.S. government fear this private army…look at what happened in 1776

56 Million People have been Exterminated due to Gun Control measures in the 20th century. Every genocide in modern history has started with a gun registration and gun control measures

and armed man is a citizen an unarmed man is a subject…

You will never change my mind on this subject….and you can have mine when you pry them from my cold dead fingers…

---

And:

---

if you notice later in my post i did say 80% of all mass shootings deaths are due to handguns…have you ever noticed that when someone is stabbed they blame the knife wielder, when someone is killed by a car they blame the driver, when someone is killed by a bomber they blame the bomber, and yet when people are killed by a gun they blame the gun and not the person pulling the trigger why is that!? Ben Franklin said it best…”Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” none of the current arguments can change history it’s a fact that 56 Million People have been Exterminated due to Gun Control measures in the 20th century. Every genocide in modern history has started with a gun registration and gun control measures…you allow them to roll back the 2nd amendment then what’s next, the first!? the fourth!? how can people forget history!? In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated. China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million ‘educated’ people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million….Statistically you stand a better chance of being struck by lightning that being killed by a gun in America…Gun ownership has increased by 56% since 1993 and yet gun violence decreased by nearly half…Every year over 30,000 people die from a gun-related death. The vast majority of these deaths are suicides. The majority of the remaining deaths are from the inner-city gang and drug violence. The remaining is Generalized violence and accidents.

As tragic as these deaths are, we have 400 million guns and over 300 million people in this country.

30,000 is roughly .01%. Not 1% and not .1% but .01% of the population. That is exceedingly far from the epidemic that anti-gun politicians constantly claim. In 2000 Maryland spent 5 million dollars on a bullet ID program. The program lasted 15 years and didn’t solve a single crime. Not a single one. The city of Chicago in 1982 instituted a ban on handguns. This ban barred civilians from possessing handguns except for those registered with the city government prior to enactment of the law. The law also specified that such handguns had to be re-registered every two years or owners would forfeit their right to possess them. In 1994, the law was amended to require annual re-registration. In the wake of Chicago’s handgun ban, at least five suburbs surrounding Chicago instituted similar handgun bans. Since the outset of the Chicago handgun ban, the percentage of Chicago murders committed with handguns has averaged about 40% higher than it was before the law took effect!!!!!

On October 1, 1987, Florida’s right-to-carry law became effective…Since the outset of the Florida right-to-carry law, the Florida murder rate has averaged 36% lower than it was before the law took effect!!!! In January 1996, Texas’s right-to-carry law became effective….Since the outset of the Texas right-to-carry law, the Texas murder rate has averaged 30% lower than it was before the law took effect!!! Between 1994 and 2004, the federal government banned the manufacture, sale, or transfer of assault weapons and large-capacity magazines. A subsequent Department of Justice study found no evidence that the ban had had any effect on gun violence and stated that “should it be renewed, the ban’s effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement.” A recent study published in the Journal of General Internal Medicine examined state gun control policies and found no statistically significant relationship between assault weapon or large-capacity magazine bans and homicide rates. A Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) study came to the same conclusion. I am sensitive to the very real problem of gun deaths in this country. But none of those deaths, tragic as they are, negate my fundamental right and duty to protect myself and my loved ones from harm. We can debate new laws that may have an effect on the margins, but most gun deaths reflect much broader problems in American society. Those who make the policies need to address the underlying causes of gun deaths AND NOT THE GUNS — particularly suicide, drug prohibition, and domestic violence, on their own terms without abridging law-abiding Americans’ fundamental right to self-defense. But the conversation in the media has been dominated by extremists on both sides and by people, who have no idea what they’re actually talking about. I’m a man who fully understands that self-defense ISN’T an abstract concept, and that more can be done to reduce gun deaths. But the answer is not an all out ban on Guns!!!!

——————————————————

There is so much to unpack. This is not an original response. Back in the day I heard Rush Limbaugh and other conservative pundits using the same arguments, many of which are now outdated. Here is my response to some of the flaws:

There are a couple of flaws in the stats as presented. A rifle is a specific type of gun. Knives, on the other hand, include all knives. It’s a very broad category. In 2021 over 48,000 people died by gun. That include accidental deaths and suicide. I can’t find a stat for knife death that includes accidental death and suicide. So, since knife deaths are only listed by murder, we should only use murder stats in 2021 for both:

Murder by gun: 20,138.

Murder by knife: 1,035.

Neither stat includes those injured.

“Blame the guns”… Whether people do or don’t is irrelevant, and a diversion. It doesn’t matter if people blame guns or not. Note that my original post does not “blame guns”, but our love, worship, and false belief they are the giver of security.

Now onto the countries listed with the assertion that gun control equals tyranny and genocide. There are many more countries that have gun controls and do not fit into the tyranny / genocide box, including England, France, Germany, Spain, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Greece, Thailand, etc.

In Israel, anyone who desires to own a gun must pass through a rigorous screening process, including physical and mental health, criminal background, and the process is repeated every three years. I would totally support that.

I’m not sure if we’ve discussed it, but I’m a former history teacher. The Franklin quote is completely out of context.

First – It was written in 1755 during the French Indian wars. He was part of the Pennsylvania state assembly. They had repeatedly sent bills to the Governor to fund the war effort. Governor refused to sign the bill because they included tax on the Penn family owned property. The Governor during that time was not voted in by the public or appointed by the legislature, he was appointed by the Penn family. The Penn family had offered to provide funding directly. Franklin was specifically noting that the Penn family, who resided in England, was trying to cede the power of taxation away from the legislature, and as we know from the revolution a couple of decades later, Franklin was very much against being ruled from afar, an “essential liberty” of the people and its government. “To purchase a little temporary safety” would be the compromise of having the Penns provide the funds, thus in effect purchasing the army.

Second – This was written in 1755. There was no Constitution or Bill of Rights. No 2nd amendment, thus no applicable in this debate.

People often get Third Reich Germany and gun control wrong. Prior to the rise of Nazi rule, as per compliance with the Treat of Versailles in 1919, most German citizens were not allowed to own guns. There was some relaxing of the hard line prohibition in 1928, but still gun ownership was very restrictive. After the Nazis took control, they passed new gun legislation in 1938, the German Weapons Act. Though gun ownership was not completely deregulated, the legislation relaxed many of the restrictions of the past two decades. Later in the year, the Nazis would pass the Regulations Against Jews Possessions Of Weapons Act, which continued the ban put in place by the previous government, but only for Jews. But, as a whole gun ownership became easier for the average German under Nazi rule.

A couple more things about that copy and paste response:

“Since 1950 almost ALL mass shootings have occurred in GUN FREE zones”

That is a quote from John Lott Jr:

“””The Crime Prevention Research Center, of which I am president, recently finished updating a list of mass public shootings worldwide. These shootings must claim four or more lives in a public place. Following the FBI definition, the shootings we list are carried out simply with the intention of killing. We exclude gang fights because they tend to be motivated by battles for drug turf. Murders that arise from other crimes are also excluded.”””

In order to make this talking point valid, he has to exclude data. The problem here is that by excluding “gang fights”, Lott removes data that otherwise fits the FBI definition. Many shootings are not “mass shootings”, but the result is still the same – someone dies at the end of a gun. Also note that Lott completely leaves out those injured and permanently disabled due to being shot. The stat on that is proving to be elusive (possibly in part due to the prohibitions place of government research of gun violence due to the Dickey Amendment in 1996 which prohibits government agencies from properly documenting gun related issues). There are somewhere between 100,000 to 120,000 injured by firearm. Add in the deaths, and you have roughly 148,000 to 158,000 affected by gun violence.

“””On October 1, 1987, Florida’s right-to-carry law became effective…Since the outset of the Florida right-to-carry law, the Florida murder rate has averaged 36% lower than it was before the law took effect!!!!”””

Again, a flawed stat. As you yourself mention above, people are murdered in more ways than just via gun. Further, when isolated for gun related deaths Florida does not seen to benefit from the law. Out of the 50 states, as of 2021, they are ranked 33rd from most gun deaths per capita. Texas, another right-to-carry state, is 28th. States with the highest gun ownership and more lax gun laws have the highest gun related death rates per capita. Mississippi, Louisiana, Wyoming, Missouri, Alabama, and Alaska are the top six in gun death per capita, and have high guns per capita. States with lower gun ownership and more restrictions have less gun deaths per capita.

Finally…

“””There are almost 400 million guns in the U.S with trillions of rounds of ammunition in circulation and yet less than 1/10 of 1% of Americans die by firearm each year…you honestly stand a better chance of being struck by lightning…”””

Whaaaa????

On average, 300 people get struck by lightning in the US each year. On average, that’s less than the amount of people who get shot on a single day.

If you’re going to advocate for gun ownership, I’d find better sources to make the pitch.

Yes. It was 17 years ago that I started the Sonicfrog blog.

Seventeen Freaking Years!!!!

In the last six years I haven’t done much here. Social media / Facebook is to blame. It’s just so easy to post there. The downside is – Good luck finding something important you posted four years ago. There is so much I wrote during the insane Trump years I’d like to return to to see if it’s still relevant.

Again. Good luck with that.

I’m planning on doing more here in the future. I need to get into the code and get media links to function better, and other tweaks. Meanwhile, here’s a random bit of history I’m posting just because:

On this day in 1923:

The Rosewood Massacre began when racial violence erupted in Rosewood, Florida after a white woman accused a black man of assaulting her.[1] When it was discovered that a black convict, Jesse Hunter, had escaped from a prison work gang, a posse of at least 200 white men from the neighboring white town of Sumner invaded Rosewood and made a house-to-house search for anyone who might be harboring the fugitive. By January 4, houses in Rosewood were being set afire, and four black and two white men had died.

On a lighter note:

In the Rose Bowl football game, the USC Trojans beat the Penn State Nittany Lions, 14 to 3. The game was the first to be played in the new Rose Bowl Stadium in Pasadena, California and was attended by 53,000 people.

Today is National Coming Out day.

Most straight people have no idea of the emotional pain one suffers when they can not live life as the person they are because society has told us all our lives our needs and desire to love and be loved by someone is wrong / a sin / evil / abomination etc. My struggles with it kept me under a cloud of severe depression in my youth through my 20’s, and that included serious thoughts of suicide on various occasions.

I don’t automatically consider everyone who is uncomfortable with the concept of homosexuality a homophobe. That said, real homophobia is still accepted and promoted in too many circles, and violent behavior motives by that hatred is all too often justified in its name. Years ago someone I loved was taken from this world because someone didn’t like that he was gay. He was bashed to death. A friend recently had to deal with physical violence from not just one, but two members of his family because he started living his life honestly, and the family members freaked because he was “being a girl”. He was verbally assaulted by others in his circle of friends and family. Even though the acceptance of homosexuality has increased in society by leaps and bounds in the last 15 years, my friends experience shows that we as a society still have a long LONG way to go to stamp out the vile rot inherent in homophobia.

PS: I’ve helped three people come to accept the fact that they are gay. One is just a couple of months into his journey. I also helped a band mate find peace with his gay son.

Helping people deal with gay is my superpower apparently.

I’m gonna try not to go into any detail, but my heart hurts.

I have a long time friend who is suddenly having very serious health issues. We’ve been friends for 30 plus years and have a lot of good history. We’ve talked some about what is going on, but not enough apparently. I was planning to go down to Southern California to visit. He was good with the idea. But, in a brief text session, I managed to be clumsy with a comment, not recognizing a shift in tone and saying something in the exchange that in retrospect I should not have. In times gone by this would have just faded away as dumb comments do.

Those days are gone.

He has no interest in ever talking to me again. I think he deleted my number. One of the best friends I ever had has dissolved our friendship.

I know part of this is a result of the tremendous stress he’s going through. I pretend I can wrap my head around it. But, honestly, that would not be truth. I know I can’t. That also makes me understand I probably can’t change this turn of events. All I can do is hope this is not the way things end between us.

Note: This was posted on Facebook, but I decided to delete it. I want to share it, but I really don’t feel putting it on that forum is constructive at the moment. Since few read this blog, and it functions more as a diary, I felt this was the right place for this.

I had been meaning to start blogging again anyway.

Culture.

It’s a strange elusive thing to conceptualize and grasp its importance and effect on our lives.

I’ve never been or felt the part of a Patriot. I went to church as a kid but never bought in. I’m a gay man, but I’ve never felt connected to the “gay culture” as it were. A few generations removed, my family has some ties to mob culture, but I have no connection to that either. I’m white….

I don’t feel I am connected to that, but how can I avoid it?

In western society, and America, all things have been geared toward the white end of the spectrum. God and Jesus are white, and it spreads from there. Thing is, you don’t notice it because it’s just there, and it’s the way it’s always been. Unless you’ve ventured beyond the surface, it’s like the water surrounding the fish. The fish doesn’t know of anything else. It’s just there. But where would they be without it?

That’s not the direction I should go with this post. Too extreme metaphorically. How about this.I know a lot of people, most are white, a few brown, who are the typical modern Conservative, insist the current crisis of racial relations, the inequality that many live with on a daily basis, is a mirage, something conjured up and passions stoked by the left-wing mainstream media. The say something like “Look, WE had a civil war and ended slavery. We died so you could be free. WE passed Civil Rights legislation in the 60s to fix segregation. Racial inequality is a lie made up by liberals to keep you enslaved.”

The last line is a direct quote from Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, Sean Hannity, Mark Levine, etc. And, inevitably, in the same breath, they all extol the virtues of the Founding Fathers, ignoring the very fact that many were themselves slave-owners, and that the Constitution they created to form this government had to include provisions that guaranteed the continuation of slavery, else it never would have been ratified by states (and white people) that relied on the institution.

How nice it is to have that cultural history of the white WE. Of the white savior, from God and Jesus on down. I can’t say I’ve indulged in that frothy brew, but the cup is always there for me for the taking. Because of where I was born, of the color of my skin, of the availability of that cultural identity, that luxury is always available to me. I would only need to embrace it. Maybe, twenty years ago, when I too was Conservative-ish, I did, at least a little. If I identify with a culture, it’s that of an artist. It’s certainly a smaller subset, but it’s the waters that I swim in with ease. It gives me comfort swimming in this pond. It gives me confidence to be able to walk up to another who also swims in this body of water and relate.To close this rambling thread, I want to point out the reason I went down this path. I’ve had a realization stuck in my head for quite a while, but I couldn’t figure out how to express it in a concise manner.

I think I have it now.

The same people who exclaim that racial inequality is not real, that the pursuit of black / brown cultural is a made-up construct foisted upon us by the liberal media / government in order to separate us and divide us, will invariably pivot right back to extolling the greatness of this country and the virtues of the Founding Fathers, not even recognizing that they are leaning on the white cultural view of the world. The fact that many of those Founding Fathers owned people, or that the Constitution was crafted with part of its purpose to keep those who embraced the institution of slavery happy, else it would never have been adopted, isn’t even an afterthought. It’s glossed over and ignored.

They are relying on their own cultural identity of white greatness and superiority. It is as vital to their identity as air is to breath. This is something the descendants of slaves and oppressed peoples simply don’t have.

10Betty Sanchez-Mallory, Mike Gentry and 8 others9 Comments2 SharesLikeCommentShare