Spider Man Encounters Affirmative Action

Spider Man Encounters Affirmative Action

It shouldn’t come as a big surprise since we already have an affirmative action president but that misguided social policy has now become a really major issue: Marvel Comics has killed off Peter Parker, aka Spider Man, and replaced him with another alliterated superhero, person of color Miles Morales.

The good news for Spidey fans is that Parker only dies in Marvel’s Ultimates series but lives on in its standard series so comic book aficionados can still enjoy his exploits in the latter. The bad news is inherent in the question, Why did Marvel feel it necessary to have the Green Goblin kill poor Parker in any series and supplant him with Morales?

The only rational explanation–if reason is applicable with comic books–is that Parker, who had evolved over the years from a bumbling teenager through various transformations to college kid, teacher, and neurotic freelance adult photographer, suffered from a significant, contemporary liability: He was white.

The Spider Man franchise had prospered from its sketchy 1990 days through 2003 and was the inspiration for a multitude of plays, toys, Tobey McGuire movies, and its ultimate achievement, the disastrous, accident-prone Broadway musical, “Spider Man: Turn Off the Dark.”

In short, Peter Parker was a big moneymaker for Marvel. Why else but a shortage of melanin call him a wrap and turn over his fame to melanin-rich Miles Morales?

CBS inadvertently comments on the ratonale without providing a social context: ”Miles Morales is a half-black, half-Hispanic super-powered teen who gets into the hero game after being inspired by Parker’s death.” Marvel writer Brian Michael Bendis elaborates with a few key observations: “He’s younger than Peter Parker, he’s coming from a completely different background, a completely different world view.”

Hmmm. Younger sells in our youth-oriented culture as do varied backgrounds in our increasingly diverse land and in those ways Miles makes sense. However, . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5163)

Affirmative Action, Anal Cavities, and Van Jones

Affirmative Action, Anal Cavities, and Van Jones

The whole notion of affirmative action is both racist and discriminatory. Giving preference to any individuals on the basis of the color of their skin rather than on the content of their character is patently un-American.

Now, where have we heard that before?

When affirmative action is applied by the White House to reward cronies with a plum job it becomes patently ridiculous, as in the case of “green czar,” Van Jones. His appointment had to have been an instance of AA. There’s no way he actually earned even a spot as liaison to the White House shoeshine boy.

Jones is a hack of the highest order, a racial agitator and a Vanny-come-lately to the green world. He latched onto the conservationist platform as a way to ingratiate himself to a wider audience and then was anointed by President Obama to be Special Advisor for Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation.

That grand mouthful of a title doesn’t come close to matching the mouthful of radical, racist invective and conspiratorial ravings that have been spewed by Mr. Jones over the years, culminating in his recent attack on Republicans as a**holes.

An obvious over-achiever, Jones has a history of vicious racial stupidity. That history must have caught Obama’s eye and convinced him that Jones would fit very comfortably in an administration jam packed with other turkeys, from Joe Biden to Janet Napolitano to John Holdren.

Much is now being made of Jones’ involvement in the “truther movement.” In 2004, as one of 100 “prominent Americans,” he signed a petition on behalf of that movement.

The petition called for a congressional investigation, an ”immediate inquiry into evidence that suggests high-level government officials may have deliberately allowed the September 11th attacks to occur,” according to the group’s website which also cited various “incriminating evidence,” http://tinyurl.com/3jg4x.

All of it is poppycock, long dismissed by rational people but dear to the hearts of rabid Bush-haters who still haven’t given up on the inane, insane charge that, “Bush knew!”

Jones may have signed the petition but now denies he ever agreed with its position and that “it certainly does not reflect my views, now or ever.” After all, he said, that was years ago.

Yeah, 5 years is ancient history.

So, here we have an Obama czar so detached from reality that he signs radical petitions with which he doesn’t agree, then dismisses the matter as occurring “years ago.”

How stupid is this guy to believe he can get away with that asinine defense? Does he think we’re all a**holes?

Well, actually he does. You can catch Jones’ reference to the anal cavity here: http://tinyurl.com/ks65bl. Incidentally, the crowd in Berkeley just loved it although his vulgarity was a non-sequitur which he threw out in lieu of an intelligent response to a question.

He followed it up with an equally senseless comment: . . .

(Read the rest at http://genelalor.com)

Black Prejudice, Black Racism, and Truth

Black Prejudice, Black Racism, and Truth

What I would most desire would be the separation of the white and black races.

Furthermore, I am not nor ever have ever been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the black and white races—that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with White people.

I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the White and black races which will ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. . . . there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I, as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the White race.

Those are not my words nor the words of David Duke nor of George Wallace. They are the words of the Great Emancipator, our 16th president, Abraham Lincoln as quoted on a distinctly anti-Lincoln website posing as a Civil War site: http://www.civilwarhistory.com/_/lincoln/Abraham%20Lincoln%20on%20Race.htm.

For the purposes of this article, I have no reason but to accept the veracity of those quotations since, one, they jibe with other Lincoln pronouncements and, two, why would they lie?

More relevant is the question of how well Honest Abe was able to foresee the future of the United States a century and a half down the line when all of his fears were fulfilled, and then some.

Was a separation of the two races a sensible and realistic aim?

Was effecting the “social and political equality of the black and white races” in America either a practicable or a reasonable goal? Was granting rights to African Americans to sit on juries, hold public office, and intermarry wise and intelligent? Was ceding to them “social and political equality” a surrender of White “superior position?”

More to the point, have any of our altered social views, constitutional amendments, bias and hate crime laws, concessions, and affirmative actions made an appreciable difference in the essential quality of Black-White relations in our country?

I think not but to even suggest that failure is to invite pummeling, figurative and literal assaults by the forces of racial political correctness who seek to accomplish racial harmony by sheer force of will. To even contest that harmony today is to invite charges of a vicious racism.

Unfortunately, it doesn’t work that way. Wishing and hoping rarely change reality. We are still a racist society, a Black racist society now, which allegation will surely evoke the most vociferous attacks. It’s yet a fact of American life though few dare state it.

I’m not suggesting that race relations in America have not improved over the last few decades but I am suggesting that the improvement has been more pro forma than substantive. It has also been a one-way street with Whites conceding to Black demands and Blacks simply demanding, and getting, more concessions.

As but one example of those concessions and after much debate, Whites caved to Black insistence and agitation and threats by establishing Martin Luther King Day, the only national holiday honoring an individual American.

Furthermore, almost eight months after the election of The Great Black Hope, there is little concrete evidence that attitudes of African-Americans have changed in any notable way. I do not suggest, either, that those attitudes are held by a majority of Blacks, although Barack Obama’s win does reflect a majority.

I further assert that those attitudes must undergo significant change before there can be any true racial conciliation. The fact that 96% of Blacks voted for Obama indicates that what we had on November 4th was in truth an election won mainly due to Black bias.

Voting for a candidate because of his race is no less an exercise in racism than voting against a candidate due to his skin color and runs counter to Rev. Martin Luther King’s injunction against racism and in favor of judging people by the content of their character.

(Worth the consideration of the reader is the article by a Black American, “Back on America’s Plantatation” on the very questionable value of liberal government programs to “help” poor Blacks: http://townhall.com/columnists/StarParker/2009/02/09/back_on_uncle_sams_plantation)

And, please don’t say people voted for Obama over McCain based on the character of a candidate no one really knew as opposed to a guy who had proven his character and guts!

Outside the South, almost 50% of Whites cast their ballots for a Black man, (86% in D.C.), and he won 30.2% of White southern votes, (including 42% of Floridians and 39% of Virginians): http://allotherpersons.wordpress.com/tables-outside-the-south-obama-gets-almost-half-of-the-white-vote/.

The matter is indisputable: Blacks are the racists in the United States of America. . . .

(Read the rest at http://genelalor.com)