BLACK REPUBLICAN BLOG

///////////////////////////////////////////
FLASHBACK: Supreme Court Affirms Racist Origins of Gun Control

Posted: 07 Aug 2019 06:48 AM PDT
[link removed]


By Frances Rice

Photo: Otis McDonald a plaintiff in the McDonald v. City of Chicago case

How ironic that, on the day Democrat Senator Robert Byrd who was a
recruiter for the Ku Klux Klan and rose to the title of Kleagle and Exalted
Cyclops of his local chapter died, the US Supreme Court ruled
unconstitutional the gun control laws that are embedded firmly in the
Democratic Party's racist roots.
At the heart of the McDonald v. City of Chicago case that is posted on the
US Supreme Court's Internet site is the Court's decision that the
Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution - that was pushed through by
Republicans after the Civil War, led by Republican Senator Charles Sumner -
is the anchor that binds state and local governments to the Second
Amendment right to keep and bear arms for self defense.
Otis McDonald, one of the plaintiffs, is a black man who just wanted to
have the right to protect himself from criminals who terrorized him in his
home with frequent break-ins. The only current black US Supreme Court
member, Justice Clarence Thomas who was appointed by Republican President
George H. W. Bush, courageously delved into the racist origins of gun
control laws to demonstrate that such laws have no place in a nation of
free people. The liberal justices on the Court, including Justice Sonia
Sotomayor who was appointed last year by Democrat President Barack Obama,
voted against the black plaintiff and his fellow Chicago residents.

The McDonald case provides a bird eye's view of the history of Democratic
Party racism. Referenced in the Court's opinion is the 1856 Republican
Party Platform that includes language about the "right of the people to
keep and bear arms." A key source used by the Court is the
book "Reconstruction: America's Unfinished Revolution 1863-1877" by Dr.
Eric Foner.
Forner's book reveals how, before the Civil War ended, Southern states
enacted "Slave Codes" that prohibited slaves from owning firearms. After
Republican President Abraham Lincoln issued the 1863 Emancipation
Proclamation that freed slaves in the rebelling states, and after
Republicans pushed through the Thirteenth Amendment freeing all the
remaining slaves, Democrats in the South persisted in keeping the newly
freed slaves from owning the means to protect themselves - guns.

The Supreme Court in the McDonald decision wrote also about how, after the
Civil War, the Southern States started passing laws, called "Black Codes",
to systematically disarm blacks, specifically the over 180,000 blacks who
returned to the states of the old Confederacy after serving in the Union
Army. In response to the "Black Codes," the Republican-controlled Congress
passed the Civil Rights Act of 1866. But the Democrats would not be
deterred. Very soon after the 1866 law was enacted, Alabama, followed by
other Southern states, again passed "Black Codes" that made it illegal for
blacks to own firearms.

Cited by the Court in the McDonald case, as an example of such a
discriminatory code, is the Mississippi law that stated: "no freedman, free
negro or mulatto, not in the military service of the United States
government, and not licensed so to do by the board of police of his or her
county, shall keep or carry fire-arms of any kind, or any ammunition, dirk
or bowie knife." In one Southern town, according to the Supreme Court, the
marshal confiscated the weapons of the returning black Union soldiers and,
at every opportunity, promptly shot black people.

The Court's McDonald decision records that: "Throughout the South, armed
parties, often consisting of ex-Confederate soldiers serving in the state
militias, forcibly took firearms from newly freed slaves". In his book
about Reconstruction, Dr. Foner revealed that in 1866, the Ku Klux Klan was
started as a Tennessee social club. The Klan then became a military force
serving the interests of the Democratic Party and spread into other
Southern states, launching a "reign of terror" against Republican leaders,
black and white. The Klan would "order the colored men to give up their
arms; saying that everybody would be Kukluxed in whose house fire-arms were
found".

In the McDonald decision, the Court pointed out how the
Republican-controlled Congress, while debating the Fourteenth Amendment,
referred to the right to keep and bear arms as a fundamental right
deserving of protection.
Republican Senator Samuel Pomeroy described
three "indispensable" "safeguards of liberty under our form of Government",
one of which was the right to keep and bear arms. Pomeroy said: "Every
man . . . should have the right to bear arms for the defense of himself and
family and his homestead. And if the cabin door of the freedman is broken
open and the intruder enters for purposes as vile as were known to slavery,
then should a well-loaded musket be in the hand of the occupant to send the
polluted wretch to another world, where his wretchedness will forever
remain complete".

Pomeroy's words reflect exactly the sentiment expressed by Otis McDonald
when he and his fellow Chicagoans filed a law suit against the
Democrat-controlled City of Chicago that had confiscated their weapons,
leaving them to the mercy of intruders who had broken open his door and
entered his home for vile purposes.

Frances Rice, a retired lawyer and Army Lieutenant Colonel, is chairman of
the National Black Republican Association and may be contacted at:
www.NBRA.Info
__________________

RELATED ARTICLES
No, the United States Doesn’t Lead the World in Mass Shootings
BY MATT MARGOLIS | PJ Media


A playground near the baseball field is cordoned off with police tape as
the investigation continue at the scene in Alexandria, Va., Thursday, June
15, 2017, the day after House Majority Whip Steve Scalise of La. was shot
during a congressional baseball practice. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)
As expected, Democrats immediately began politicizing the shootings in El
Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio. Quite a few of them even blamed Trump. Like
clockwork, calls for more gun control have commenced. Democrats are even
trying to pressure Mitch McConnell to cancel the Senate recess so they can
vote on gun control.
A common myth you can expect to hear a lot in the coming days and weeks is
that the United States “leads the world in mass shootings” and therefore we
must pass some law that will do nothing to stop future mass shootings, but
will infringe on the rights of law-abiding gun owners.
What you might not hear is that this claim is completely bogus.
Sure, if you following conservative media, you’re probably aware of this.
Townhall, The Daily Signal, Bearing Arms, FEE, The Washington Examiner, and
others have all previously reported on how the myth that the United States
leads the world in mass shootings is based on a deeply flawed study, which
has been debunked by the Crime Prevention Research Center.

Yet, the myth remains alive and is sure to be regurgitated endlessly
again.The following video from John Stossel explains how the myth got
started and why it's bogus:
CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE VIDEO: “Mass Shooter Media Myth”
Many on the left have tried to delegitimize CPRC’s research. Snopes rated
their claim as “mixed” but CPRC debunked their assessment here. Glenn
Kessler, the fact-checker at The Washington Post, also suggests that CPRC’s
research is misleading for including acts terrorism, which, he suggests,
inflates the number of mass shooters abroad, however, if we excluded acts
of terrorism from mass shootings, the El Paso shooting would not count as a
mass shooting, as it is now being investigated as domestic terrorism. The
Orlando Pulse Nightclub shooting, and the Las Vegas shooting were also
considered domestic terrorism incidents. If those, and other similar
incidents, don’t count as mass shootings but as terrorism, then we should
be having a completely different discussion.
In the end, the problem of mass shootings (and gun violence in general) is
not one to be solved by knee jerk reactions, finger-pointing, useless
legislation or unconstitutional gun grabs. The left will do whatever they
can to politicize these incidents because they think they can gain power
from it. They don’t expect most Americans to do the research required to
fully understand the big picture.
Matt Margolis is the author of Trumping Obama: How President Trump Saved Us
From Barack Obama's Legacy and the bestselling book The Worst President in
History: The Legacy of Barack Obama. You can follow Matt on Twitter
@MattMargolis
[link removed]
____________________


Vox Confirms That, Yes, They Do Want to Take Our Guns
BY STEPHEN KRUISER | PJ Media

A policeman searches a small handbag of a young lady during a large police
search for guns and other weapons, in Berlin, March 28, 1933. (AP Photo)
The brutal news about the mass shootings over the weekend has once again
left social media and the blogosphere flooded with thousands of ignorant
hot takes offering solutions that won't solve anything.
Predictably, the Democrats running for president have been some of the
worst offenders. As expected, they're all full of cries for congressional
action, however vague. The tragedies have highlighted just how little
difference there is between them.
I try to avoid social media in times of tragedy but I allowed myself to be
lured in today and made a couple of quick observations, this one coming
after seeing three or four elected Democrats blame Mitch McConnel for
America's societal woes:
------
SFK@stephenkruiser
I will say this: none of the top-down, increased federal intervention
solutions to society's ills are worth a damn. They're all about a lust for
power & further entrenching a bureaucracy that keeps them rolling in $$$.
-----
The progressive brain trust over at Vox.com posted a rather long article
that was one of the more honest leftist anti-gun pieces I've read in a
while and illustrates precisely why law-abiding gun owners are so
distrustful of the anti-Second Amendment crowd.
The post admits early on that Congress doesn't have a magic wand it can
wave an make it all go away:
But let's be clear about precisely what kind of decision is letting events
like this recur, most recently in Dayton and El Paso. Congress's decision
not to pass background checks is not what's keeping the US from European
gun violence levels. The expiration of the assault weapons ban is not
behind the gap.
What's behind the gap, plenty of research indicates, is that Americans
have more guns.
Once getting to the obvious, the article moves on to the thing we normal
gun owners have been called paranoid for believing all these years:
Realistically, a gun control plan that has any hope of getting us down to
European levels of violence is going to mean taking a huge number of guns
away from a huge number of gun owners.
It's the main points of those paragraphs that always bring me to my main
problems with the Democrats' lust for "sweeping gun legislation" in
whatever form they propose.
The first is the number of guns issue. We have always had a lot of guns
here in the United States. The proximity/availability argument from the
left has always been weak to me, especially as I'm an Arizonan. I grew up
around guns. Heck, my liberal friends are all gun owners here. If there
were a logical thread that could be run through the availability argument
then we should be under siege here.
The tragic mass shooting we had in Tucson years ago was done by a lunatic
who had been on local law enforcement's radar for years and nothing was
done about him.
Of all of the worn-out lines from either side, one remains true: most
proposed legislative "fixes" to gun violence largely end up just punishing
people who obey the law.
My reward for having done everything right is to be left more vulnerable to
attack from those who don't?
As arguments go, that one moves me not at all.
There are plenty of deep conversations that should be had about the recent
mass shootings in America, all involving ideas that can't be zipped up in a
convenient social media rallying point.
Nobody's got time for that though.
At least the leftists have gotten to the point in this "debate" where they
have — unwittingly or not — admitted that they've indeed been lying about
wanting to take our guns.
[link removed]

///////////////////////////////////////////
America Is Drowning in the Left's Lies About Trump

Posted: 06 Aug 2019 09:48 AM PDT
[link removed]


By Dennis Prager | Townhall.com

The president of the United States, Donald Trump, never said there
were "fine" Nazis or Ku Klux Klansmen.

This is one of the two great lies of our time -- the other being that all
Trump supporters are racists -- and perhaps in all of American history. I
cannot think of a lie of such significance that was held as truth by so
many Americans, by every leading politician of one of the two major
political parties and disseminated by virtually the entire media.

The major news media need to understand these are important reasons that
half of America considers them frauds. And we get no pleasure from this
fact. The reason we don't recoil when the president labels the mainstream
media "fake news" is that we know the charge is true. Has one major media
news outlet yet apologized to the American people for preoccupying them for
nearly two years with the lie of "Trump collusion" with Russia? Has one
Democrat? Of course not. Because with regard to the Trump-Russia collusion
issue, the news media were never driven by a pursuit of truth; they were
driven by a pursuit of Trump.

In my last column, I offered a way of proving Trump supporters are not
racists. The timing was, unfortunately, perfect. I could not anticipate how
two horrific mass shootings would enable the left -- the press, the
Democrats, academics and Hollywood -- to scream even louder than before
that Trump and his supporters are racists and that their racism is why such
shootings are taking place.

This is all predicated on what may be the most glaring lie of all: that,
after the Charlottesville demonstrations, President Trump said Nazis
are "fine people."

The president never said there were fine Nazis. The left-wing assertion
that the president of the United States said there were fine Nazis will
long endure as an example of something that has been true since Lenin:
Truth is not a left-wing value. Truth is a liberal value, and it is a
conservative value. But it is not left-wing value. A leftist says whatever
is necessary to gain power.

By remarkable coincidence, this week's PragerU video is titled "The
Charlottesville Lie." It proves the president never said Nazis were fine
people. When Trump said there were "very fine people on both sides," he was
referring to people demonstrating in Charlottesville for and against
tearing down a statue of Confederate general Robert E. Lee, not to Nazis
and antifa.

The video is presented by CNN political commentator Steve Cortes, a voice
of courage in the herd known as the mainstream American media. At this
moment, of PragerU's 325 videos, Cortes's "The Charlottesville Lie" is the
one I most want Americans to watch. The harm that the media and others on
the left have done and continue to do to this country by charging the
president with praising Nazis and other white supremacists is incalculable.
It has only served to inflame and divide Americans: the tens of millions
who believe the lie and the tens of millions who know the truth.

Typical of the former is author Wajahat Ali, whose attack on supporters of
the president recently appeared in The Atlantic, which identifies Ali
as "the lead author of ... Fear Inc.: The Roots of the Islamophobia Network
in America." Ali has the audacity to write: "I feel compelled to ask Trump
supporters: Is it worth it? How many have to suffer for you to feel great
again?" The Atlantic is proud to publish such hate-inducing mendacity.

And the left accuses conservatives of hate.

Aside from the clear evidence that the president never called Nazis "very
fine people," isn't the very idea preposterous? Trump has a Jewish
daughter, a Jewish son-in-law and Jewish grandchildren. Nazis want Jews
dead.How do all the New York Times columnists, CNN anchors and
correspondents and Democratic officeholders who say the president called
Nazis fine people and who believe the president is a white supremacist
reconcile those two facts?

They don't -- because they can't, and because they can get away with saying
anything they want. When a nation's media and one of the two dominant
parties are in lockstep, they can lie all they want.

New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand said, referring to El Paso: "(Trump) has
created a national emergency of rampant white nationalism across the
country. ... I think we need to blame President Trump and the rhetoric he's
used since he got elected."

Beto O'Rourke, in an obscenity-laced statement against the president the
day after El Paso:"He's not tolerating racism, he's promoting racism. He's
not tolerating violence, he's inciting racism and violence in this country.
We shouldn't be asking if ... he's responsible for this when we know the
answer."
Meanwhile, half a day later, there was another mass shooting at a popular
nightspot in Dayton, Ohio, resulting in nine deaths, including the
shooter's sister. Not much political hay against the president is being
made of that one because, according to early reports, the shooter was a
leftist, antifa-supporting Democrat who said he'd be happy to vote for
Elizabeth Warren.

It is worth recalling that after the assassination of President John F.
Kennedy, the American media blamed the assassination on right-wing bigotry
that, they said, permeated Dallas. That Kennedy was murdered by a communist
quickly disappeared from media descriptions of the assassination. Today, it
is all but unknown to the American people.

Lee Harvey Oswald was a communist. And President Trump is not a white
supremacist. No matter what the press says.

P.S. I just learned that within hours of PragerU posting "The
Charlottesville Lie," Google placed it on YouTube's restricted list -- just
two weeks after a Senate hearing at which a Google representative swore
under oath that Google doesn't censor on the basis of political views. The
ease with which the left lies is breathtaking.

Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and
columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in April 2018, is "The
Rational Bible," a commentary on the book of Exodus. He is the founder of
Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.
[link removed]

--
You are subscribed to email updates from "BLACK REPUBLICAN BLOG."
To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now:
[link removed]

Email delivery powered by Google.
Google, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States