Bill’s Bleeding Heart Show

Does Bill Maher think Matt Drudge is making up stories about black malice?

No. He condemns Drudge’s editorial focus, not his veracity. Drudge pays undue attention to negative black behavior. Who decides what constitutes undue attention? Bill Maher says Bill Maher decides. But we already knew that.

Bill wants you to know Matt Drudge is a racist. Bill misses the point entirely. Who cares who’s a racist anymore? It doesn’t matter why Drudge insists on rubbing Bill’s prominent proboscis in black misbehavior and violence (Maher “monitored” every disgusting post that week). Maher derides the relevance of Drudge’s choices. But of what relevance is the reality of black malice?

Liberals will remind you violent crime generally remains down, and the average American still hasn’t a reasonable fear of blacks as long as he stays out of their neighborhoods. So only the bad people, the Other White People, notice. It is a matter of proud indifference for Bill.  But the violence itself is the least of it; it’s what that violence demonstrates: the Left’s critique of race and civil rights is a thoroughgoing lie. Black, not white, Americans are failing at equality. Black America is rejecting the Western liberal tradition, to the extent it understands it.

Bill Maher thinks he’s outraged by Matt Drudge’s stereotyping of blacks; by his prejudice against them; by his lack of (what Bill refuses to call) Christian charity toward them and their problems. But we can see that’s pure bunk.

What should fret Maher is what black violence and failure says about the myth of white racism, founding myth of the perverted Christianity that progressivism has become. Without it, and without its redemption fable–absolution by righting the ultimate wrong of white American slavery (with Barack Obama as a minor messiah)–the entire progressive edifice is threatened. As that messiah gives the tacit approval of silence to the violence while concurrently betraying every traditional (dread word!) progressive cause, it has to dawn, eventually, even on Bill, that black folk, and any elite that may come from them, want nothing whatsoever to do with his absolution. They can neither spell nor define the word. Bill is just another white chump taken in by the brothers. If only he was poor white trash he would have seen it coming.

Something John Derbyshire said in his Gawker interview  strikes me: the present anti-racist hysterics might be explained by the justified anxiety of the Left before the demographic carnage it has wrought. We all have to swim in the same waters. Or at least, insulation is expensive. But if one can’t trust in that timeless American image of the noble, suffering black, if black America shoves him aside to celebrate such buffoonish monsters as, yes Bill, a Mike Tyson or Reverend Farrakhan, then what can one trust? The black-white reparations model has been adopted by all manner of political identity, culminating in the sudden domination of gay advocacy. All these other identities are invested in black Americans at least making a show of it.

When Bill snarls that Matt Drudge should look away or shut up, he is engaged in containment. Potential waves of disillusion threaten to cascade outward, leveling the theoretical architecture of the American Left. The oppression of the past explains the malice of the present, convention demands; the crime thinker wonders if the malice of the present doesn’t in fact explain the oppression of the past. The Narrative wearies. The Left should be worried. They have created a model and a monster called Resentment, encouraging all to apply for a franchise.
Thee have conquered. Now what?

This presents an existential crisis for the individual. If black people really are their own worst enemy, and their neighbors’ worst enemy, what’s it all been about? For the faithful Bill Maher, all he’s left with is a Godless world and a big lie.

Shocked, Shocked

Prosecutors managed to revoke George Zimmerman’s bail today over a financial disclosure technicality. They, and Martin family attorney Ben Crump, want to jail him until an expected trial next year. From the AP:

At Friday’s court hearing, De la Rionda and O’Mara also asked a judge to stop the public release of witness names and statements made by Zimmerman to police officers. Those documents normally are part of the public record under Florida law. 

“What’s occurring, unfortunately, are cases are being tried in the public sector as opposed to in the courtroom,” De La Rionda said. “We are in a new age with Twitter, Facebook, and all these things I’ve never heard of before in my career. Everybody gets to find out intimate details about witnesses that never occurred before. Witnesses are going to be reluctant to get involved.”

Nooooooo! Prejudicial media hype and intimidation?! After the hearing the prosecutors no doubt collected their winnings updated their social media pages.

Your google hits sir…

Of course, today’s hearings were largely (and maybe primarily) an operation intent on prejudicing the prosecutor’s “public sector” against Zimmerman, an opportunity to get this quote in the papers:

“This court was led to believe they didn’t have a single penny,” said De la Rionda. “It was misleading and I don’t know what words to use other than it was a blatant lie.”

I am unmoved. The AP helpfully shepherds us through the narrative:

Crump was asked if he thought that if Zimmerman would be willing to lie about his finances that he would be willing to lie about what happen the night Martin was killed.   

“We fully expect that the special prosecutor will make George Zimmerman’s credibility be front and center in this entire case,” Crump said. “And whatever dishonesty that comes forth by George Zimmerman that they can prove, you can best believe it will be the issue of this case and rightfully so.”

I’m sure there’s enough integrity left in the courts that Zimmerman will be allowed to post a higher bond and remain free for the time being. Perhaps this prosecutorial stunt has something to do with negotiations behind the scenes–to apply pressure or make good a threat.

The original AP story’s lead has been updated (Sat 6/2) to take up the narrative assault on Zimmerman’s credibility:

The credibility of Trayvon Martin’s shooter could be an issue at trial after a judge said that George Zimmerman and his wife lied to the court about their finances to obtain a bond, legal experts say.

At no point will an analysis of Zimmerman’s accusers’ credibility get its own news cycle, of course.

The Audacity of Expedience

From this NYT article on Obama’s drone war:

They describe a paradoxical leader who shunned the legislative deal-making required to close the detention facility at Guantánamo Bay in Cuba, but approves lethal action [drone strikes] without hand-wringing.
(…)
Yet the administration’s very success at killing terrorism suspects has been shadowed by a suspicion: that Mr. Obama has avoided the complications of detention by deciding, in effect, to take no prisoners alive. While scores of suspects have been killed under Mr. Obama, only one has been taken into American custody, and the president has balked at adding new prisoners to Guantánamo.
(…)
David Axelrod, the president’s closest political adviser, began showing up at the “Terror Tuesday” meetings [where that week’s drone assassination targets are decided upon], his unspeaking presence a visible reminder of what everyone understood: a successful attack would overwhelm the president’s other aspirations and achievements.

Earlier I had taken to calling Mr. Axelrod “the Undertaker” because he looks like one with that somber visage, but now the moniker seems apt for other reasons.

All out of transformation: Chewing bubble gum and keeping the president’s “aspirations” in the black.

Criminalizing Context Recognition

It had to end here. The Trayvonicus lynch-meme sputters on, but is starting to look like a particularly depressing Al Sharpton hoax as we learn George Zimmerman’s injuries were documented and consistent with a beating. Eyewitnesses testified to them from the start of course, but most Americans have only the legal discovery process to thank for the belated information. The networks were too busy with the sort of yellow journalism that had Marcia Clark declaring George Zimmerman sustained no injuries because, as the security camera video clearly shows, he retains powers of locomotion and isn’t cradling his gutted entrails like a football just hours later (not since Bill Frist video-diagnosed Terri Schiavo…).  Of course this evidence was available to the special prosecutor brought in to bring Zimmerman up on charges. Didn’t make it into the affidavit. Hey, I think I found that crime you been looking for!
But Zimmerman’s real misfortune is to not have been born George Ramos. That’s what so aroused the elite media, at first expecting nothing more than another ritual sacrifice to the national god of black resentment. Now they have this potential national race riot on their hands. So no matter if Zimmerman looks increasingly innocent; the thing must be seen to its (responsible elites hope) riot-defusing conclusion. As if by evil design then it will run alongside the president’s election campaign of race-baiting demagogy–five more months, including summer, pumping the bellows of resentment (November or Bust!)–on one hand and the traditional summer season of black on white violence on the other. The diversity demagogues are fighting this one like there’s no tomorrow. Maybe they’re right.
 But they have a fallback position. At first they told us, and some (blessed naifs) believed George Zimmerman stalked and murdered a black boy. That position is no longer tenable. But there’s no walking this one back down. So out comes the lamest of the stable of American white racism tropes: racial profiling. No matter what transpired, it all came as a result of Zimmerman’s racist stereotyping. Cognition aforehand! Note that whether Zimmerman was right or not about Trayvon Martin isn’t allowed in polite discussion; Martin’s good nature is presumed. But a prosecution based on racial profiling would have to contend with this question, and the reality of statistical probabilities and black menace, in a high profile criminal trial. Does the left really want that?
It will get interesting, watching them argue this with a straight face against the backdrop of the traditional summer season of black on white violence. But of course they will. To maintain critical race theory’s dominance over convention requires ever-greater powers of media denial, and the powers so far on display have been awe-inspiring. Ignoring violence such as last summer’s flash-mobs in the age of Drudge and American Renaissance would seem impossible, but the respectable media did such a good job of it many of them truly don’t even know it happened (“news to me” was one reporter’s response, given as he defended censoring race out of a reported attack; and I’m willing to bet he still hasn’t made the connection between his dereliction and his ignorance!).
And if they don’t get to notice they’ll be damned if we do either. So now George Zimmerman is a potential test-case for criminilazing “racial profiling”, not by law enforcement (whatever validity that may have), but by a common citizen. The ABC News article linked ABC News article linked to above, revealing the extent of Zimmerman’s injuries as well as Trayvon’s (one set of bruised knuckles; one gunshot wound) gets around to it in the last paragraph:

However, the prosecution contends that Zimmerman instigated the confrontation after profiling the teen, who was walking home after buying skittles and ice tea. They prosecution says Martin was breaking no laws and was not disturbing anyone as he walked back to his father’s girlfriend’s home.

With the FBI now threatening hate crime charges, George Zimmerman may become the first American citizen convicted of racial stereotyping.

Now Repeat After Me

The Derbyshire agitation has so excited the wolves The National Review has deemed it necessary to throw a second passenger from the troika. The pack won’t be sated as long as they’re on the scent of blood, of course, so the remaining riders must be eyeing one another warily. Who’s weak? Who’s suspect? Is it me? Terror achieved.


Just a day after Rich Lowry agreed to dispatch contributor John Derbyshire for hate-cognition the editor was called on his new standard of association. From the left’s Internet middle-management corps came the blog-memo: Robert Weissberg said “white nationalism” at an American Renaissance conference, surely a sin as great as Derbyshire’s–ergo…
Lowry wouldn’t make the same mistake twice–this time he’d waste no time in capitulation. He posted Weissberg’s denunciation immediately, thanking the complainant for bringing the matter to his attention. Moving along…
But opening his disavowal with “Unbeknowst [sic] to us…” invites more interrogation: How could you have not known? Just what did you know? Who’s responsible for associating the magazine with these men? Why the typo? Someone have a guilty conscience?

Alex Kurtagic notes Lowry’s curt dismissal of Weissberg uses the same adjective for Weissberg’s actions–“noxious”–his leftward cousin used in the initial accusatory blog. Perhaps it was coincidence–but such sloppiness is hardly a more charitable explanation.

I imagine it as that familiar scene in the movies; a mafioso reprimands an underling, delivers an order, then:
“Do we understand each other?”
“Yes”.
Mafioso leans in, speaks deliberately:
“No. I need to hear you say it. Do we understand each other?”
Subordinate gets it, grows solemn.
“We understand each other. And thank you Mr —-“.
“Don’t mention it”.
Mafioso gives subordinate a condescending pat on the cheek.*

Now go get your shine box, Mr. Lowry.

“I never agreed to three points on top of—gahgagghaggh!–noxious, right!–gaguhgrr!–noxious, noxious, I got it!”

*Lowry’s quick-cave drew the condescension it deserved in an update to the original point-and-sputter post:
Update: Lowry has severed ties with Weissberg. In a statement, Lowry noted, “Unbeknowst to us, occasional Phi Beta Cons contributor Robert Weissberg (whose book was published a few years ago by Transaction) participated in an American Renaissance conference where he delivered a noxious talk about the future of white nationalism. He will no longer be posting here. Thanks to those who brought it to our attention.”
You’re welcome.

It’s all so genial!