COSTA MESA...
LIBS HAVING COGNITIVE DISSONANCE OVER 'RACISM'
A LIBERAL AXIOM: Only Whites can be racist (meaning only Whites can hate people of other races and/or can discriminate against them. Non-Whites can never be racist or discriminate against people of other races).
THE REALITY: a).Any racial/ethnic group which, as a group, understands reality knows that it must work for the benefit of its group and does so. b). Calling Whites racists all the time is simply a way to shut them up and keep them from organizing
as Whites, just as all other racial/ethnic groups organize for their groups.
THE COGNITIVE DISSONANCE: When liberals come upon situations where non-Whites hate and/or discriminate against Whites or show pride in who they are or who do other things for their group and not other groups, the liberals have a hard time accepting the reality of this and defining this as racism but they would immediately say it is racism if it was Whites doing it and they then try to justify the non-White hate or discrimination against Whites, often by blaming Whites for White racism, White privilege, etc. When Blacks overwhelmingly voted for Barack Obama because of the color of his skin, liberals hardly ever pointed out that this was a racist vote (as they use the term racist). And, as you can read in my column below this one, there are racial/ethnic caucuses in the Sacramento legislature, but there is no White caucus and the liberals would, no doubt, be against a White caucus as racist but even praise the non-White racial/ethnic caucuses as examples of non-Whites showing pride in themselves or their groups.
At any rate, with the foregoing in mind, below is a link to a liberal column prefaced by a short article by us that we ran yesterday under THE WORLD...but we're running it again here, above the fold, because we want to make a point that liberals (and some who aren't so liberal) have false ideas and double standards about the so-called human condition and they experience cognitive dissonance when their most cherished ideas are seriously challenged or shown to be false. Be sure to read the comments below the linked article for a taste of liberal cognitive dissonance in action.
In this case, and in summary, a group of Chinese in Irvine held a meeting to try to stop a veteran's cemetery from being built in that city. The meeting was apparently advertised as being a town hall meeting (read open to all). However, when a group of non-Chinese military vets showed up, they weren't allowed in. The question then becomes: Were they kept out because they're not Chinese or were they kept out because they're vets or was there some other reason for not letting them in?
The article below on the liberal Website hints that the reason for the vets being kept out may be because they're not Chinese, and not even,
horrors, Asian (except for one old guy who looks Asian, but not Chinese). If they were kept out for not being Chinese, was this racism? Horrors, again. Only Whites can be racist, right? Well, you get the point. [Insert cartoon of robot melting down while repeating over and over: "DOES NOT COMPUTE, DOES NOT COMPUTE, DOES NOT COMPUTE"--that dear readers is cognitive dissonance.
Here's the short piece we ran yesterday with the link to the liberal Website.
ASIANS DISCRIMINATING AGAINST NON-ASIANS IN IRVINE?
Long column on a liberal Website that seems to have a hard time getting to the point that a group of non-Asian veterans weren't allowed into a meeting about a proposed cemetery for veterans in Irvine.
Was this racial discrimination? Well, one could probably expect the Website writing about this to not have been treating this subject so gingerly had this been a White group holding the meeting and had the White group not let in non-White vets.
# #
And, here's my column referred to above...
EUROPEAN-AMERICANS NEED A CAUCUS IN THE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE
by H. Millard
It was recently announced that State Senator Marty Block, (D-San Diego), started the Legislative Jewish Caucus and that this caucus will also form a political action committee to raise money for Israel-friendly candidates. Block told the press that the Legislative Jewish Caucus "isn't a religious based organization. We see this as an ethnic organization." This statement was presumably made to both forestall Muslims from starting a Muslim Legislative Caucus and also to head off complaints that the Legislative Jewish Caucus is breaching the wall between religion and state.
These caucuses work, sometimes behind the scenes and out of public view, to represent the interests of their ethnic/racial groups. They write legislation and take other actions on behalf of their particular ethnic/racial groups even though the people they are acting on behalf of may not live in their districts. In other words, unlike the traditional American political notion that people elected to public office represent a specific geographic area, these ethnic caucus members represent "their people," no matter where they live in the state.
An example of what the members of these ethnic/racial caucuses do was presented in the Daily Pilot recently in a story about State Assemblyman Roger Hernandez, a member of the Latino Legislative Caucus, who has authored a bill that would force cities such as Costa Mesa to end city wide voting and replace it with district voting. District voting is a scheme that will lead to gerrymandered districts in Costa Mesa, in an attempt to include Latino voters in certain districts and exclude White voters from the districts.
On the welcome page of the Asian Pacific Islander Caucus we read this: "[T]he Caucus was founded in 2001 and serves to represent and advocate for the interests of the APIA community...."
On the Website of the Latino Legislative Caucus we read: "The Mission of the California Latino Legislative Caucus is to identify, promote and advocate on behalf of the professional, educational, social, political and cultural interests of the Latino Community."
And, on the Website of the Legislative Black Caucus we read: "The continuing mission of the CLBC is to provide our unwavering commitment and support to our goal of achieving full inclusion of our state’s Africans American residents in every aspect of California life – from education and employment to housing and health to commerce and government services."
So, there you have it. Four ethnic/racial organizations all advocating for the interests of their people. Who advocates for White people? No one.
Now, some who haven't kept up with the news may say that a White Legislative Caucus isn't needed because Whites are in the majority in the state. Actually, we're not. Latinos have ether reached numbers parity or have exceeded the size of the White population. Some others may argue that Whites are not an ethnicity, but a race, and that we shouldn't lump the various White ethnicities (or people who originated in many different European nations) together under one rubric such as White. Well, the Asian Pacific Islander Caucus lumps various Asian and Pacific Islander populations together, and the Legislative Black Caucus is based on race.
I'll ask and answer this question once again: Who represents Whites and White interests? No one.
It's time to change that. Will we now see some White legislators start a White Legislative Caucus? Probably not. Why? Because Whites have been so brow beaten about race that it seems many are even afraid to order a gallon of white paint at the hardware store lest they be called racist. The result of this racial intimidation that Whites have undergone for years is that Whites are left without any real representation for their particular interests (and we have many) in the state legislature.
Those timid souls who are so brow beaten that they run from the word "white," can simply use the term European-American if it makes them feel more comfortable.
