Subscribe to

Consider This

in Apple Podcasts

Apple Podcasts

in Google Podcasts

Google Podcasts

in Stitcher

Stitcher SmartRadio

on Android

Subscribe on Android

or the “podcatcher”
of your choice

RSS

Race Issues Archives

Can you tell the difference? Apparently, she can't.

Can you tell the difference? Apparently, she can’t.

The effects of a minimum wage increase was researched recently by the federal government. Guess what they found out? (Hint: You’ll think you’d heard it here before.)

Apparently, after 3 days performing what amounts to an “armed sit-in”, the 20 white guys holed up in a remote, Oregon wildlife preserve visitors center were did not have the National Guard descend on them due to … wait for it … racism. You know, the same National Guard that weren’t summoned to Ferguson, MO for 9 days.

And can you describe the difference between a Democrat and a Socialist? Apparently, the front-runner for the Democrats in the Presidential race can’t.

Mentioned links:

MP Graphics Facebook page

Hiking Minimum Wage an Inefficient Tool to Fight Poverty: Fed Research

The Effects of Minimum Wages on Employment

Armed men, led by Bundy brothers, take over federal building in rural Oregon

Timeline of events in Ferguson

WaPo Columnist Claims Racial Double Standards In Oregon Standoff

Video: Matthews discovers that Hillary can’t tell the difference between Democrats and socialists, either

Read the rest of this entry

Tyshawn Lee. Does his life matter?

Tyshawn Lee. Does his life matter?

President Obama supports an update to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that would suddenly turn many churches into something similar to racist hate groups. Is this a good  idea?

And if you haven’t heard of Tyshawn Lee, I think you should. You can’t be blamed if you just watched the usual media sources. The story of this 9-year-old victim of another Chicago shooting made the news, but then just as quickly vanished. Where are the protests? Oh, that’s not me asking, that’s a black columnist, who has  a few other questions.

Mentioned links:

Obama: Traditional Christians = Racists

Obama supports altering Civil Rights Act to ban LGBT discrimination

Black Lives Matter In The Streets Of Chicago, Too…Or Do They?

Young Mom Shot in Home Invasion Fires Back, Protects Baby

Read the rest of this entry

Sandblast it?

Sandblast it?

This episode’s topics were chosen by listener feedback. You do have a voice on the podcast!

Mike was wondering about whether history is going to be erased after (what amounts to) a “Robert E. Lee slept here” plaque was removed because it was allegedly a Confederate “symbol”.

And Barb weighed in with her opinion of whether or not Whataburger can choose who it serves. Can they decide that they won’t let in anyone openly carrying a gun?

You, too, can get your voice heard on the Facebook or Google+ pages, by tweeting me, by e-mail, or by phone by calling 267-CALL-CT-0 (267-225-5280). And there’s a comment section below where you can make your voice heard as well, and discuss with other listeners.

Mentioned links:

Read the rest of this entry

Sorry, Charlie.

Sorry, Charlie.

Is it legal to refuse service to someone at a food establishment? Can a business decide who it will and won’t serve? Yes it is. If you are openly carrying a firearm, the Whataburger chain in Texas will kick you out, even though open-carry is legal in that state. That’s their right. Wonder how that  would apply in other cases.

Juan Williams is somehow amazed that black Americans would want to protect their vote. Well, that’s not exactly how he put it, but that’s how it turns out. And that method of protection is supported by 3/4ths of the country. See, we can agree on some things!

And finally, we have a follow-up on the fall-out from the show of support of Charlie Hebdo. Free speech won! Well, for a little while, but, with a whimper, it gives up.

Mentioned links:

Whataburger takes stand against new open carry firearms law in Texas

Indiana pizza shop that won’t cater gay weddings to close

Juan Williams: Dems should not be losing voting-rights fight

Charlie Hebdo waves the white flag

Read the rest of this entry

The victims of the Charleston massacre

The victims of the Charleston massacre

The killings at the Charleston Emmanuel AME Church shocked the nation with its example of the evil of racism raising its ugly head for all to see. It’s not about guns or flags; it’s about evil.

It seems, though, that equally as shocking was the reaction of the families of the victims, but certainly a different kind of shocking. Love and forgiveness were readily available to the killer from those he hurt. Why is that? Where does love like that come from? I’ll explain.

Mentioned links:

$1M bond on weapons charge for shooting suspect, bond not set on murder charges

Emotional response to SC victim testimony

The powerful words of forgiveness delivered to Dylann Roof by victims’ relatives

Read the rest of this entry

Suddenly, not so racist anymore (AP)

Suddenly, not so racist anymore (AP)

Former President Bill Clinton, former Atlanta mayor Andrew Young, Cliven Bundy, and the Bureau of Land Management walk into a bar. The bartender looks at them and says, “Sounds like an episode of ‘Consider This!'”

Indeed it is, and it’s one in which I find common ground with Clinton and Young, but manage to tie that together with Bundy’s slavery remarks. Really. It can be done.

It seems that it makes a difference who is proposing voter ID as to whether or not doing so is automatically racist. It also seems like if someone is a racist, then larger issues take a back seat (if they get a seat at all). OK, enough said. I’m tipping my hand.

Mentioned links:

[Podcast Review] “Consider This” Podcast with Doug Payton [The Freelance Spotlight]

Bill Clinton on voter ID: Why not solve the problem by putting a photo on every Social Security card?

Conservatives begin backing away after Cliven Bundy’s remarks disparaging ‘the Negro’

Racist Nevada Rancher Cliven Bundy Reveals the Depths of Conservative White Supremacism Denial

Read the rest of this entry

An endangered species?

An endangered species?

Some students at the University of Minnesota do not like the fact that, when descriptions of the suspects of crime on campus are made public, the race of the student is included. But is reporting it worth the risk?

The percentage of Americans no longer looking for work is the highest it’s been in almost 40 years. Do we really want to be pushing people out the door because ObamaCare gives them  an incentive to quit? Do we really want to tear out the incentive to work from society?

When the government is caught in a gross abuse of power, the nation’s media have been all over the story; Watergate, Iran-Contra. But somehow this fire has been lost when it happens these days.

Mentioned links:

‘U’ Students Want Crime Alerts To Avoid Using Racial Descriptions

White House: It’s A Good Thing That Obamacare Will Drive 2.5 Million Americans Out Of The Workforce

They quit their jobs, thanks to health-care law

How much is Obama to blame for the worst labor participation rate in 40 years?

George Will: IRS Scandal as Big as Watergate and Iran-Contra; So Where’s the Media?

Read the rest of this entry

Episode 52: Bill Clinton and Voter ID

Back in episode 47, I had pretty much said what I thought about the Supreme Court’s decision on the Voting Rights Act. Basically, the act was not struck down or gutted, as some have claimed. Rather, the very common sense decision was made that, if states or precincts were going to come under the pre-clearance section – that is, if any and all changes to voting laws must be pre-cleared with the federal government – then the statistics used to determine who is subject to it ought to be updated, rather than being statistics left over from 40 years ago.

Well, that’s just too much for some folks. Former President Bill Clinton, for example, had to mar his speech at the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech with misinformation, and frankly, one outright lie. I use that portion dealing with voting rights laws as a springboard to clear the air and get to the truth of the matter.

Mentioned links:

“Consider This!” Episode 47: A Look at the Supreme Court Rulings; Voting Rights Act, Defense of Marriage Act, and California’s Proposition 8

CLINTON: CONTINUING RACISM MEANS HARDER TO VOTE THAN BUY ASSAULT WEAPON

Despite voter ID law, minority turnout up in Georgia

Read the rest of this entry

Can a state government decide what law it will and will not uphold? In Pennsylvania, the state Attorney General has promoted herself to state Supreme Court Justice by refusing to defend a state law’s constitutionality because of her own personal opinion of the law. So then, do we need to keep two sets of laws for the state; one with a Democrat as the AG and one when it’s a Republican? When the US Supreme Court said that the people of California didn’t have standing to try to keep their own constitutional amendment in force, they opened the door to this.

The Left’s “Birthers”: 26% of Obama voters think the Tea Party is a larger terror threat than radical Muslims. Yes, really.

The trial of George Zimmerman riveted the nation’s media attention for weeks, which is understandable when the charges are 4 counts of 1st degree murder and 1 count of 3rd degree murder. OK, I’m playing with you there. It was just 1 count of 2nd degree murder that was on the line for George Zimmerman. Those other charges were against Kermit Gosnell, the abortion doctor, who was ultimately convicted of 3 of the 4 murder 1 counts, and the murder 3 count was reduced to involuntary manslaughter. So how did the coverage compare?

And all the while, in that shining beacon of gun-control, Chicago, hundreds of people, many of them Trayvon Martin’s age and race, are shot dead every year. They don’t get media coverage, or marches, or Attorney General Eric Holder’s attention, or a moment of silence at a Beyonce concert.

Mentioned links:

Pa. attorney general says she won’t defend state’s gay marriage ban

26% of Obama Supporters View Tea Party as Nation’s Top Terror Threat

Fred Thompson’s tweet

Abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell convicted of first-degree murder

Top Media in 1st Week of Trials: Gosnell, 5 Stories; Zimmerman, 203 Stories

Trayvon Martin, one year later: When will black-on-black slayings get the attention they deserve?

Read the rest of this entry

I’m a little under the weather this episode, and my voice reflects that. But I’m here anyway to bring you conservative commentary in 10 minutes or less.

This time around, I’m taking a look at 3 landmark rulings from the Supreme Court last week; striking down a portion of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, striking down a portion of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), and telling California voters that they can’t defend their own constitutional amendment if their politicians won’t do it themselves.

Is 50-year-old data better than current information when trying to determine who should come under the Voting Rights Act? Have we learned nothing from the mistakes of the past? The four liberal Supreme Court justices, Attorney General Eric Holder, and President Obama would answer No to both those questions, at least based on the outrage they feigned over the ruling. They can’t seem to bring themselves to believe that progress has actually occurred. Or they’re pandering to their base. Either way, to call requiring these stats to be updated “turning back the clock” is cognitive dissonance of the highest order. The request is that the clock be turned forward, and Democrats are against it. Or they are pretending to be against it, and hoping that their base isn’t paying attention.

Regarding DOMA: Basically, now that states decide what marriage is, the logical end of this is that marriage will mean what anyone wants it to mean, which means it will be meaningless. Since states were redefining an already well-defined term, it fell to the federal government to bring a little order and common sense to this chaos. I didn’t like it, but didn’t see any other good way out of it.

Regarding Prop 8: While I’m against true direct democracy (the ol’ “two lions and a sheep voting on dinner” analogy), the proposition feature of California law has a high enough bar to clear to get something on the ballot to safeguard that. But now the people’s will can be simply ignored, with the ruling of a single judge, and we, the people, have no standing to challenge it at the Supreme Court. Wow.

Mentioned links:

Supremes to Congress: Update the Voting Rights Act

Voting Rights Progress

Three at Last: What almost everyone is missing about the Voting Rights Act decision

SUPREME COURT STRIKES DOWN PORTION OF DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT, THROWS OUT PROP 8 APPEAL

Thoughts on DOMA and a Reaction Roundup!

Behold: The Democratic Process

Episode 38: What Marriage Is, Why It Matters, and the Consequences of Redefining It [Consider This podcast]

California ballot proposition

Read the rest of this entry

 Page 3 of 4 « 1  2  3  4 »