“What have they got that I ain’t got?” – Cowardly lion in the Wizard of Oz

It didn’t take long for Holder’s poorly considered comments to ignite a frenzy of criticism.  While he is certainly a sworn opponent of the 2nd Amendment, and therefore a domestic enemy of the Constitution, he is being unfairly pilloried in this instance.  His comments were taken out of context by most – he didn’t comment (although one might reasonably expect based on his associations and other professed beliefs that he holds America and her citizens in generally low regard) on our cowardice in the face of danger, but rather limited his critique to the lack of courage which he contends characterizes our discussions about race.

Fair enough.  I say he is correct.  But is it cowardice or prudence?  If you lived in East Berlin and heard mines and/or machine guns periodically murder a soul searching freedom you would likely try to endure the persecution rather than demonstrate your courage by rushing the fence.

Discussing race (or gender, sexual proclivity, etc.) in the US today is like rushing the fence.  Ironically it is Mr. Holder and his ilk who have created, abetted, emboldened and enabled the very forces which constrain a reasonable racial conversation.  Back to that in several lines.  But first…..how terrifying is it that he believes that influencing the way you spend your weekends is even remotely within the purview of the government?

The government has created a regulatory framework so perfectly structured to foment grievances and perceived slights that it almost seems intentional.

• “Affirmative Action” is state sponsored and mandated racism (Racism = Prejudice or discrimination based on an individual’s race; can be expressed individually or through institutional policies or practices – noting that neither prejudice nor discrimination in their traditional usage imply malice e.g. “A connoisseur with discriminating taste.”) through which one person is denied a position because of their race, gender, etc.
• Hate crime – we accept at face value the absurdity of harsher penalties for crimes determined by the government to be driven by hate.  Now certainly there are crimes of passion, which may by definition be driven by a twisted love, but with rare exceptions how many crimes are not indicative of hate regardless of the attributes of the offender and the victim?  But even more telling, those regulations are only applied in one direction.  The gay who murders the straight does so with passive emotion but the straight murdering the gay is driven by blind rage at the gays proclivities?
• The bar is so low to bring a law suit in the US, the costs so staggering, and juries so ignorant that “capos” like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have built personal financial fortunes by bludgeoning individuals and businesses with frivolous litigation.  And yet repeated attempts to return some sanity and order to the system have been routinely squashed – again by Holder’s ilk.

Don Imus who made a gratuitous remark was destroyed.  Eventually he reconstituted his show, and the addition of Tony and Careth brought two talented contributors.  His sycophantic prostrations before Dick Gregory and Debra Dickerson, however, are manifestations of the degree to which he was forced to endorse radical and racist ideas in order to preserve his career.  Don’t you suppose General Holder that the lessons of episode caused more than a couple people to avoid any discussion of race?

And who will enforce the Lilly Ledbetter law which unconstitutionally restricts compensation and which certainly will drive any discussion of gender further from the public square?  Of course, General Holder.

As though to mock Holder’s point, the very Right Reverend Sharpton has again appeared prominently in the media this very day.  His cause celebre?  The cartoon in the New York Post by Sean Delonas.

Big Al would have us believe this is a racist attack.  So clearly referring to the CT chimpanzee attack and the common impression that the bailout bill was written by a collection of barely sentient pols with no comprehension of economics, it is clearly not racist.  But in the world that Eric Holder helped create, intent, and even reasonable inference, matter not.

So while Holder laments the current situation, and does so with sympathy and company from many who wish our public discourse was not so charged, he should accept culpability for his role in creating that very environment.