Inside the "Progressive" Mind of NYC's Mayor DeBlasio

Inside the "Progressive" Mind of NYC's Mayor DeBlasio

 

I was a one-time liberal, before I grew up and learned something.  I was certainly not in the same class as today’s liberal-leftists in the Democrat Party and I always (ok, usually) get a good laugh at the extremes to which the lib-left goes nowadays.

Take, for example, the new Communist-Democrat mayor of New York City, “progressive” Bill DeBlasio.

Even prior to his November election, he courageously announced he would rescue hansom carriage horses from their involuntary servitude hauling tourists around Central Park.  If implemented, DeBlasio’s rescue plan would send dozens of carriage drivers to unemployment lines and probably consign their well-tended horses to glue factories or cans of Alpo.

As with all “progressives,” the mayor regards misplaced charities as more important than the well-being of human beings.

Both pre- and post-election, De Blasio made it vividly clear that he considered the highly-effective NYPD policy of stopping, questioning, and frisking suspected criminals constituted racial profiling and was racially discriminatory.  On assuming the mayoralty, he banned the practice, ignoring the reality that stop-question-frisk mainly benefitted blacks in black neighborhoods by getting dangerous miscreants off their streets.

Liberal-leftist politicians proudly and invariably favor criminals' rights over the rights of their law-abiding constituents.

Ever-faithful to his campaign promises, last week the new resident of Gracie Mansion launched his threatened war against what are by far the best alternatives to the miserably-failing New York City’s public school system, charter schools. 

Those alternatives also happen to be the bane of De Blasio’s most avid supporters, the National Education Association and the New York State United Teachers.

DeBlasio, the NEA and the NYSUT oppose and despise charters because, by virtue of their educational achievements; those schools accent the failures of public school systems and the mayor is counting on the products of those schools to (God forbid!) reelect him in four years.

Last Thursday, De Blasio scrapped former Mayor Bloomberg’s green-lighting of two new Success Academy . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=36085.)

Race Crimes and the People Who Encourage Them

Race Crimes and the People Who Encourage Them

 

I may be wrong on this but isn’t one of the principal responsibilities of every police department and their counterparts on university security police departments to prevent crime and apprehend criminals?
Apparently the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) doesn’t think so anymore than do black activists at the University of Minnesota.

In an article in their magazine, SPJ redundantly warned their membership that when reporting racial violence, mentioning race in their stories is a journalistic no-no, in their politically correct opinion and regardless of the obvious fact that identifying the race of an assailant, a rapist, a mugger, etc. is critical to catching and prosecuting them and is usually among the first questions asked by 911 dispatchers and among the first detail dispatchers transmit to patrol cars.

According to WND.com, the article reflected “what dozens of chapters around the country tell its members in regular seminars: Unless someone is considerate enough to wave around a sign saying, ‘Kill Honky,’ or issue a press release or utter racial expletives in front of lots of witnesses, the fact that the suspects just happen to be black has no bearing on the story.”

The oldest and largest organization of journalists in America unprofessionally added that anyone doubting their no-no policy, was probably a “racist and hater.”

Oddly coincidental with the SPJ’s major breach of journalistic ethics, members of UM’s African American and African Studies, Black Faculty and Staff Association, Black Graduate and Professional Student Association, Black Men’s Forum, Black Student Union and Huntley House for African American Males jointly directed a letter to UM president and a vp.

The letter, sent over a month after the campus locked down because of an attempted robbery and after university police had wrongfully identified a black student as the suspect, made no mention of the school’s 25 robberies, an increase of 27% percent over the last few years, but it did register a slew of black complaints.

While initially professing deep concern over campus safety, the letter-writers clearly felt that racial profiling was their overriding interest since it could be absolutely devastating for black male students.

An excerpt: “[We] unanimously agree that campus safety should be of the UMPD’s utmost importance; however, efforts to reduce crime should never be at the expense of our Black men, or any specific group of people likely to be targeted. In addition to causing Black men to feel unsafe and distrusted, racial profiling is proven to inflict negative psychological effects on its victims.”

At a forum on the profiling issue, Ian Taylor Jr., president of the Black Men’s Forum, said members of his organization feel threatened when racial description [sic] of suspects are provided in university crime alerts. . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=35462.)