Trayvon Martin, Meet Michael Brown

All it took for Al Sharpton and the other race hustlers to rush off to Ferguson, Missouri, was for a 6’4,” 250-pound gangbanger named Michael Brown to be shot while struggling for a cop’s gun. That’s also all it took for Eric Holder to decide to send the F.B.I. in to investigate what he decided within mere hours was a federal crime.

My question is why none of these actions are ever taken when, as is usually the case, it’s some black thug who’s killing other black people in Chicago, Detroit, Atlanta, Philadelphia and L.A. Perhaps it’s because if they did, Mr. Sharpton wouldn’t have the time left to host his MSNBC show and even Eric Holder would have to start skipping meals if he wanted to keep calling white people “racists” on what seems to be a daily basis.

As for Barack Obama, after finding a moral equivalence between Israel and Hamas, it wasn’t too surprising that he did the same when it came to the rabble who were rioting and looting in Ferguson and the members of the Ferguson P.D. who were merely trying to protect the law-abiding citizens and the businesses that employ them and serve their community.

Clearly, the president is a hollow shell without a moral compass. In fact, if anyone ever decided to stage a production of “The Wizard of Oz,” they could do it on the cheap by hiring Obama to play all three of Dorothy’s traveling companions. Unlike Ray Bolger, Jack Haley and Bert Lahr, this fellow was born to portray a man without a brain, a man without a heart and a third who lacked courage.

Although I have seen a number of photos on the Internet showing young Mr. Brown flashing gang signs that suggest he was an active member of the Bloods, the photos I haven’t seen, I’m happy to say, are those showing him as a cherubic-looking 10-year-old, as was the case with the 6’2” Trayvon Martin.

As you may have noticed, Hillary Clinton has been trashing Barack Obama’s foreign policy lately, hoping that we’ll all forget that as his Secretary of State, she implemented most of it for four long years, and that as recently as a few months ago she doubled down on the reset with Russia, insisting, with a straight face, that it was brilliant statecraft.

In the Middle East, we have the clearest divide between good and evil that has existed since World War II. On one side, we have peace-loving Christians, Jews and Yazidis, while on the other we have blood-lusting Islamic butchers. Things are so apparent that even the Vatican, against its long-standing tradition, has called for military action. And, yet, Obama, playing to his left-wing base, keeps assuring our enemies that we will never have boots on the ground. My question is: why do we even have a military, aside from providing a backdrop on those rare occasions when Obama wants to appear patriotic?

I’m just asking, you understand, but when people join the Army these days, is it with Obama’s personal guarantee that they’ll never be expected to engage in warfare?

When I heard that the divorce rate was going down in America, I took that as a good sign until I discovered it was because the marriage rate has plummeted even faster. Like just about every other societal calamity, I assume the source of this decline can be traced to our colleges and universities. One would assume that curriculum devoted to feminist studies, achieving self-induced multiple orgasms, experimenting with homosexuality and the acceptance of transgenderism as an alternate life style, would culminate with a generation that is so self-absorbed that marriage licenses will at some future point only exist at the Smithsonian, along with Jefferson’s writing desk, Franklin’s walking stick and dinosaur bones.

Another contributing factor is the portrayal of marriage on TV and in the movies. It is usually depicted as armed warfare, with husbands depicted as stupid, boring, close-minded louts and wives pictured as potential high-flyers who would be soaring through the clouds were it not for having had their glorious wings clipped through the twin tragedies of marriage and children.

These days, when laughs are at a premium, I found myself chuckling while watching a documentary dealing with Charley Chaplin’s depiction of Adolph Hitler in “The Great Dictator.” One of the talking heads in the documentary was Reinhard Spitzy, apparently a friend of Der Fuhrer. When asked if Hitler, apparently a great fan of American movies, had ever seen Chapin’s satire, Spitzy said he had, and not just once, but twice.

And when asked how Hitler would have reacted to it, Spitzy, insisted “He would have laughed. Hitler wasn’t dull. Hitler wasn’t a killjoy, and within the inner circle, he could definitely laugh at jokes.”

If Mel Brooks ever decides to make a sequel to “The Producers” with its “Springtime for Hitler” musical number, he could do a lot worse than “Hitler Wasn’t a Killjoy.”

Finally, someone let me know about a sign that was allegedly posted on the wall above the latrine at a country club. In my estimation, not since the great English humorist P.G. Wodehouse hung up his niblick, has anyone done a better job of summing up the world of golf: “Welcome to This Facility. It is the only place on the grounds where nobody will try to change your stance or adjust your grip.”

Burt’s Webcast is every Wednesday at Noon Pacific Time.
Tune in at His Call-in Number is: (818) 570-5443

©2014 Burt Prelutsky. Comments? Write

“Not Just Another Poll” and “MSNBC: Where Anyone Can Be A Host”

I’d like to thank everyone who took the time to respond to my recent poll. As I said at the time, it was not, and was not intended, to be one of those scientific polls where people like Gallup and Zogby try to garner a cross-section of the American public. I have no idea what the racial, religious, gender or economic, make-up might be of the 265 respondents to the First Stupendous Prelutsky Poll. All I knew was that they were not typical voters. For one thing, they don’t rely on the mainstream media for their news. For another, they’re literate. And, finally, one of them was a Russian living in St. Petersburg.

I would venture that they are all Republicans, including my Russian reader. I base that on the fact that it’s only Republican blogs that carry my work. But even if I hadn’t known that, I would have based the assumption on the fact that in response to the question regarding which TV commentator they trust the most, 30 different people were mentioned, and not one of them works for ABC, CBS, NBC or MSNBC. However, 23 of them host their own shows on Fox or appear so regularly on Fox, you might think they host their own shows.

Now, without further ado, here are the final results:

The top vote-getting commentator was Bret Baier with 45 votes. Megyn Kelly came in a close second with 42. In third place, with 37 votes came “I Don’t Trust or Watch Any of Them,” with Charles Krauthammer’s 36 nipping at Nobody’s heels. Among those who received 10 or more votes were Brit Hume and Sean Hannity (16); Bill O’Reilly (12); and Glenn Beck (11).

It was only when I got to my second question, the one regarding the biggest problem facing America, and began tabulating the votes that I realized I should have provided limited choices. That’s because there was a great deal of overlap, and I wasn’t always certain how to group certain responses. Clearly, I would have saved myself a lot of time and energy if I hadn’t stipulated that people couldn’t just respond with “Barack Obama.”

For instance, because a few people specified, say, “Liberalism,” I wasn’t sure if I should combine it with those who thought “An Expanding Federal Government” was our biggest headache. Another question mark I was faced with was whether or not to combine votes for the “Public School System” with “An Ignorant and Apathetic Electorate.” On the other hand, I didn’t have a problem adding the very specific “Widespread Acceptance of Homosexuality” to the more general category of “Godlessness/Moral Decline.”

The top vote-getters were “An Ignorant and Apathetic Electorate” (36); “Expanding Federal Government/ObamaCare” (33); “Open Border/Illegal Aliens” (30); “National Debt” (24);“Godlessness/Moral Decline” (21); “Lack of Accountability in Washington” (18); “Unemployment” (14);” and “A Corrupt Media” (11).

The response to my question about the advisability of Barack Obama’s being impeached in 2015, after the midterm elections, was slightly more mixed than I expected, with 188 votes for and 48 against. But the majority of those voting No explained that they really wanted him going to jail; were afraid it would backfire on the Republicans in 2016; or, in a few cases, didn’t want to see Joe Biden in the Oval Office. I, on the other hand, would love to see Biden, the incumbent, and Mrs. Clinton duke it out in the primaries, so long as the GOP nominee eventually wound up winning the general election.

Speaking of which, in response to “Which GOP nominee you would most prefer to see topping the ticket in 2016, it was nip-and-tuck all the way, but in the end, Ted Cruz edged out Ben Carson 65-62. Scott Walker came in third with 50 votes. Of the 27 names that were mentioned, the only others who received double digits were Trey Gowdy with 18 and Rand Paul with 11. The only ones to receive more than five votes were Mitt Romney and Marco Rubio (9), Allen West (8); Sarah Palin (6); and Bobby Jindal (5). Just for the record, Jesus Christ and I each got one vote.

For those of you who live to say “Gotcha!” I acknowledge that if you add up the number of votes garnered by those 12 people, you come up with 245. So how is it that with 15 other politicians receiving between 1 and 4 votes each, I would have the gall to claim that only 265 people responded to the poll? Okay, I‘ll come clean. It’s because some people simply couldn’t limit themselves to a single candidate. Would you have had me tell them to just suck it up and make a decision for once in their miserable, wishy-washy, lives? I considered it, but, heck, I don’t have that many readers to begin with. I figured there was no point in pissing off the precious few I do have.

When it came to the GOP candidate they least wanted to see as the standard bearer, 17 people received dishonorable mentions, along with “Any RINO,” “Any country club blueblood,” “Anyone whose parents weren’t American citizens when he was born” and “Anybody who’s been in Washington for more than six years.”

Of the 17 individuals mentioned by name, the top vote-getters were Jeb Bush (76) and Chris Christie (73). For a while, the lead kept switching back and forth, but in the end, Jeb and “Anyone Named Bush” pulled it out.

Others who received double-digit negative votes were John McCain (18); Mitt Romney (14); Rand Paul (11); Rick Santorum and Marco Rubio (10).

I wish I could have personally responded to all 265 of you, but if I had, you wouldn’t have gotten the results until October. So please accept this general thank-you to all who took part in the proceedings, and a grateful tip of the hat to all of you who didn’t bother. I can’t believe how time-consuming this polling business can be!

Frankly, I don’t know if we can conclude anything from these results. But at least now you can’t go around bad-mouthing polls for no better reason than that you’ve never been polled. And for my part, I can brag that in certain weird quarters I’m as popular as Jesus.

“MSNBC: Where Anyone Can Be A Host”

If it were up to me, “Unfair and Unbalanced” would be the motto of MSNBC. Instead, they’ve chosen to go with “Lean Forward.” When your hosts include the likes of Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews, Ed Schultz, Woody Allen’s kid Ronan Farrow and Al Sharpton, you’re not really running a cable news network, though. It’s really more of an asylum for the insane and the inane.

In some quarters, MSNBC stands for Morons, Slackers, Nitwits, Bigots and Cuckoos. What other so-called news organization would offer a bully pulpit to the likes of Al Sharpton? As S.E. Cupp reminds me, Sharpton is the race-baiting weasel who has said the following about Jews: (“If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house.); about white people and gays: (“White folks was in caves while we was building empires. We taught philosophy and astrology and mathematics before Socrates and them Greek homos ever got around to it.”); abut Mormons: (As for the one Mormon running for office, those who really believe in God will defeat him anyway, so don’t worry about that.”)

I think we can all draw some comfort from the fact that, judging by the ratings, not even their hosts are watching MSNBC.

Inasmuch as huge numbers of Iraqi soldiers doffed their uniforms and laid down their guns in spite of out-numbering the mutants comprising ISIS, perhaps we can all agree to stop arming Muslims. In the future, when going to war with followers of Allah, let us keep in mind we should never trust them with our weaponry. That’s because they are far likelier to use them on us than on our mutual enemies.

Recently, my friend Steve Maikoski wryly observed that Obama’s foreign policy has been a success; we are now a foreign country. But I would say that while that must be the way we appear to our allies, it is because of his domestic agenda that so many of us no longer recognize the nation where we were born and that we grew up loving.

For instance, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office decided to cancel the trademark of the Washington “Redskins” because they decided it was derogatory to Native Americans. For those of you who don’t think this is a big deal, you’re wrong. For one thing, it violates the First Amendment. For another, it means that, as with the IRS and the FBI, yet another federal agency has decided to abandon its independence in favor of doing Obama’s bidding. And, finally, it is encouraging people who have no connection to the team or the NFL to engage in what is immoral and should be illegal behavior by marketing team paraphernalia.

Not too surprisingly, one of the few entities to applaud the decision was the Council for American Islamic Relations. CAIR, the Islamic Bund, agreed that “Redskins” is disparaging to Native Americans, although one poll after another has shown that the majority of Native Americans don’t feel even slightly disparaged by the name.

So, while I oppose the action of the Patent Office, I wouldn’t mind in the slightest if team owner Daniel Snyder decides to field a team known as the Washington Ragheads.

A while back I heard from a reader, Joe Sprowls, who objected to my calling for the elimination of the VA. It had been my suggestion that our military veterans be provided with vouchers they could use in the private sector. But because he identified himself as a disabled vet and because he convinced me that the doctors at the VA are the ones best-equipped to deal with certain types of medical problems, I had to respect his dissenting opinion.

After mulling things over, I came up with a compromise. For the sole purpose of caring for those vets suffering from war-related injuries, I would allow the VA to keep its doors open. That would slash costs, diminish the size of the bureaucracy and cut down on the wait time for appointments. All other veterans would get those vouchers. Just for the record, Mr. Sprowls signed off on my proposal.

Here in California, because Jerry Brown, with the indulgence of an overwhelmingly Democratic Assembly and State Senate, runs things, we are now faced with the prospect of hundreds of millions of our taxdollars going to fund a high speed train. Although it’s been labeled The Train to Nowhere, it’s actually scheduled to run between L.A. and San Francisco.

In 2008, 53% of the voters decided they couldn’t live without it. Today, the percentage of those who still favor its construction rests at 41%. But Governor Brown continues to promote it in spite of the state’s teetering on the brink of financial ruin.

Even for Brown, previously known as Governor Moonbeam, it’s a nutty idea. Aside from its enormous price tag, the fact remains that California is a car culture. Most people cover the 400 miles between the two cities in about six hours. The choo-choo promises to cut that time in half. Big deal! Once you arrive, unless your whole purpose was to compare the two train depots, you’ll have to go to the bother and expense of renting a car.

Nobody really knows why Jerry Brown is so gung-ho about getting the darn thing built. I can only assume the schmuck always wanted his own toy train set and his dad, chintzy Pat Brown, never got around to buying him one.

Burt’s Webcast is every Wednesday at Noon Pacific Time.
Tune in at His Call-in Number is: (818) 570-5443

©2014 Burt Prelutsky. Comments? Write

Regarding Obama & Other Turkeys” and “A Reality Check”

Shortly before Thanksgiving, Obama, having heard that there were still a few extra bucks lying around waiting for him to vacuum up, jetted out here to California. While standing next to Dream Works studio boss/Obama hand maiden Jeffrey Katzenberg, Obama gazed out at the studio employees and, proving that his magical powers are more than a rumor dreamed up by Jay Carney, said: “I can see by looking at you that some of you weren’t born here.”

Assuming that by “here,” he meant the United States, and not the studio, just exactly how did he come by that conclusion? And if he has that capability, isn’t it just possible that when other people look at him and decide he wasn’t born in Hawaii, they might be right?

He followed up that performance by suggesting that we should all sit around the Thanksgiving table and talk up the glory of the Affordable Care Act. What’s more, he was serious. I confess that our little group is occasionally at a loss for conversational fodder once we’re past the mashed potatoes, but I can’t imagine that things would ever run so dry that anyone is likely to say, “How about that ObamaCare! Is it great or is it great? Pass the stuffing, please.”

When Obama went back to the White House and granted the Thanksgiving turkey an executive pardon, it wasn’t, as some people assumed, a matter of tradition, it was professional courtesy.

Speaking of Thanksgiving, isn’t it time we at least considered changing its date from the fourth Thursday in November to, say, the fourth Thursday in May? After all, it’s an arbitrary date, unlike Christmas, which at least conservatives will agree celebrates a birth, and isn’t really a tribute to winter and lousy weather, as atheists and other assorted pinheads seem to believe.

Why should we be giving thanks at a time of year when Christmas, Chanukah, New Year’s and my birthday, all converge – especially when there’s barely time to get home from one family reunion before it’s time to pack up for another? Besides, I think more people are thankful in May than they are in November – and one of the things they’re most thankful for is good weather, which makes travel easier because there are no snowstorms turning airports into barracks.

In Canada, Thanksgiving is celebrated on the second Monday in October. Okay, that’s Canada, a place where ice hockey is a national sport. But even here, it has only been a national holiday since the end of Reconstruction in the mid 1870s.

In 1939, FDR, caving to retailers who feared that because the fourth Thursday didn’t fall until very late in the month, Christmas sales would suffer, decided to move it up a week. That year, there were actually two Thanksgiving Days, with his critics mockingly referring to the early one as Franksgiving Day. In 1940, 16 states decided to ignore FDR’s wishes and celebrated the occasion on the traditional date. The pushback was so great that in 1941, Congress capitulated, and passed a law ensuring that the fourth Thursday would be the one and only Thanksgiving.

But, if they could change it once, they can do it again. I’m only suggesting they not change it by a piddling week, but by six months.

One of the things I was thankful for this year was that even Al Sharpton – yes, that Al Sharpton! – acknowledged that the Knockout Game, the vile competition in which black teenagers sucker punch white people – apparently garnering additional points if their victims are elderly or Jewish – isn’t a myth concocted by white conservatives in order to portray young blacks as human scum, but is a disgusting reality.

Inasmuch as Sharpton even went so far as to refer to them as thugs, you might think that white liberals in the media would finally find within themselves the courage to acknowledge that when you’ve had generations of black kids being raised without fathers, widespread black hooliganism isn’t an anomaly or a giant lie perpetrated by white racists, but is the inevitable result of a 70% rate of illegitimacy. How on earth can that not translate to a lack of discipline, which, in turn, guarantees a vicious cycle of crime, drugs and violence?

If Reverend Al can finally be honest about the fact that young black villains are not the result of white hostility, but of black irresponsibility, and that they are the victimizers far more often than they’re the victims, you would think that Barack Obama, the members of the Congressional Black Caucus and the liberal media, might follow suit.

I realize that I am only dreaming, but this is, after all, the season of miracles.


It’s mainly because we get to see senators on TV all the time, making pronouncements from on high that when it comes to handicapping presidential runs, senators get most of the attention. However, all that being a senator prepares you for is voting. That’s because the Senate is part of the legislative branch of government, whereas being president puts you atop the executive branch.

Being a governor, however, is similar to being a president. He has to know how to work with legislative bodies in which most of its members might belong to a different party. He has to know how to delegate responsibility. In short, he has to be an executive smart enough to surround himself with competent staffers, and not merely possess a voice box and a compulsion to see himself on the evening news. That is why I hope to see someone like Scott Walker, Mike Pence or Bobby Jindal, heading up the GOP ticket in 2016.

I wouldn’t object to someone like Ted Cruz, Rand Paul or Marco Rubio, being a running mate, if it’s necessary to provide geographical balance to the ticket or to help carry an important state.

Unlike others, I look back longingly on the days when a few savvy party bosses picked the candidates, and didn’t leave it up to primaries and state caucuses to thin the herd. All those do is waste a ton of money and leave the eventual candidate bloody, while bestowing the Democrats with a multitude of sound bites with which they can then pummel their opponent in the general election.

In New York City, mayoral candidate Bill De Blasio, who brags about having worked for ACORN, vows to take the city in a new leftist direction. His first step in that direction will be to eliminate the NYPD’s “Stop and Frisk” program that has lowered New York’s murder rate under both Rudy Giuliani and Michael Bloomberg. In most municipalities, that, alone, would cost De Blasio the election. But because most New Yorkers use their brains as seat cushions, he is the prohibitive favorite to wind up with the keys to Gracie Mansion.

Meanwhile, in D.C., 61 senators chose to allow the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) come to a vote, although the seven Republicans – Ayotte, Portman, Toomey, Heller, Collins, Hatch and Kirk – were holding out for amendments that would permit religious employers some leeway when it came to hiring homosexuals, bisexuals and members of the transgender crowd. Maybe it’s just me, but even if my religion was okay with it, if I were an employer, I really wouldn’t want to have to hire someone I didn’t want to hire. It seems to me that if it’s okay to deprive service to people who aren’t wearing shoes and shirts, it should be an employer’s right not to hire people who feel the need to act out their sexual freakiness on his premises.

The so-called architect of ENDA, Chai Feldman, a member of Obama’s Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, was recently quoted saying that in a conflict between those in her protected classes and those who feel their religious rights are being trampled, “I can’t even imagine a situation in which I’d come down on the side of the religious.” Very odd, you’d think, coming from the daughter of a rabbi. But these days, most rabbis, being to the left of Nancy Pelosi, would probably applaud her.

I confess I can’t come to grips with those who think that Republicans should be more willing to compromise with the Democrats. For one thing, as we saw during the passage of the Affordable Care Act, the Democrats wouldn’t even pretend to consider one of the 85 amendments offered by House Republicans; and, for another, at the so-called bi-partisan meeting hosted by the newly-elected president in 2009, as soon as John McCain opened his mouth to make a suggestion, Obama quickly shut him down, reminding him who had won the election.

But, really, how does anyone expect those who view George Washington, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, as their spiritual fathers to reach accord with those who see Karl Marx, Fidel Castro and Saul Alinsky, in that light?

Speaking of which, can you imagine a worse Thanksgiving than one at which the Emanuel brothers, Rahm and Ezekial, are seated at the table? Rahm, Chicago’s mayor, is a notorious potty mouth, while Ezekial, who is referred to as the Architect of ObamaCare – and actually takes pride in that designation — is a rude and obnoxious motor-mouth who, if you’ve caught his act with Chris Wallace or Megyn Kelly, refuses to let anyone else utter a word in his presence.

While catching hell for repeatedly lying about people being able to hang on to their health insurance and their doctors, Obama predictably accused others of “spreading misinformation, fear and cynicism.” One can only wonder if his Teleprompter has a reflective screen that doubles as a mirror.

Based on the fact that even some of Obama’s lap dogs in the media have joined the chorus calling him a liar, and that about a dozen Democratic senators appear ready to jump ship before the mid-term elections, it appears that hunting season for lame ducks is opening even earlier than usual.

Finally, when I recently saw a headline announcing that actress Michelle Pfeiffer admitted to having once belonged to a cult, I wondered at first why that was newsworthy. Then, reading on, I discovered that in her youth, she had joined a group of fanatical vegans, and not, as I had naturally assumed, the Democratic Party.

©2013 Burt Prelutsky. Comments? Write

The Conspiracy Theorist’s Form of Blind Justice

justiceIt doesn’t surprise me that a lot people were disappointed by the acquittal of George Zimmerman – the Martin family in particular. They believed, as most parents would in the same situation, that the man who shot their 17 year-old child deserved to be held accountable in some meaningful way for the taking of their son’s life.

I get that.

But expressing disappointment and sorrow is one thing. Claiming that justice wasn’t served (as many have done over the past week) is another. Anyone who followed the trial with even an inkling of objectivity understands that there just weren’t any grounds for convicting George Zimmerman of a crime. He wasn’t found innocent due to a technicality. He wasn’t found innocent because of a racist jury or an incompetent prosecution. He was found innocent because all available evidence of what happened on the night Trayvon Martin was killed pointed to a classic case of self-defense.

What I’ve found shocking is that for far too may people, that just doesn’t seem to matter. The mere, unsubstantiated presumption that George Zimmerman is a racist has been grounds for disregarding practically everything that actually happened that tragic night. There was a real hope for Zimmerman to be convicted and sent off to prison, and it wasn’t because of anything that was presented during the case. It was because of the prejudicial thoughts that might have been running through Zimmerman’s mind when he first spotted Trayvon Martin walking through his neighborhood.

So when I listen to people call Florida an “apartheid state”, propose an economic boycott, and remark that it’s open season for killing black teenagers there, it seems to me that “justice” is the very last thing on their minds.

Clinging to a false conclusion, and doing so by willfully ignoring all evidence and facts that negate that conclusion more resembles a conspiracy theory than it does an earnest quest for justice. Like a conspiracy theory, the passion behind it isn’t fueled so much by the facts of the event, but rather by the general mistrust of a powerful establishment – in this case, what is perceived as the white establishment in this country. And when that mistrust is so deeply rooted, there’s always an eagerness by certain individuals to attribute heinous acts to it, without factoring fairness or accuracy into the equation.

In this case, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson (among others) are those individuals. When you think about it, they aren’t so different than Alex Jones and Jesse Ventura: A pair of opportunistic nuts whose public relevance relies on the fanning of conspiratorial flames. Unfortunately, Sharpton and Jackson have more influence. From a Dead Sleep - by John A. Daly

I would love for someone to try and make the case to me that associating Trayvon Martin’s name with self-serving charlatans somehow pays respect to the boy’s memory. Because as far as I can tell, all it’s done is make the “Justice for Trayvon” movement as shallow of a call to action as the 9/11 Truther movement’s call for “truth.”

It’s a rhetorical crusade driven by its own form of prejudice.

Who exactly is being served by that crusade? Certainly not the Martin family, and certainly not the African American community.

The New Meaning of Justice

justice-dictionary-definitionSince the day Trayvon Martin was shot, all I’ve heard are screams for “justice.”  What exactly does that mean?

According to my dictionary, justice means, “n. 1.a. The principle of moral rightness; equity.  b. Conformity to moral rightness in action or attitude; righteousness.  2. The upholding of what is just, esp. fair treatment and due reward in accordance to honor, standards, or law; fairness.  3. Something that is just or due.  4. The quality ofr being just, fair, or impartial.  5. Conformity to truth, fact or sound reason.  The administration and procedure of law.

After the George Zimmerman verdict came down on Saturday, there were plenty of people tweeting about the verdict, among them lots of celebrities.  There were demonstrations all over the country and, according to news reports today, vigils are scheduled all over the country to demand “justice for Trayvon.”

So, based on the cries for justice after the verdict, I think a few new definitions should be added to our dictionaries.


1.  Whatever any one person wants or thinks justice should be.

2.  A jury verdict which should be ignored by anyone who doesn’t like it even though said jury sat through an entire trial, observed witnesses testify, saw the evidence, listened to arguments from both sides, was instructed by a judge as to the relevant law, reviewed all the evidence and applied the law to reach said verdict.

3.  A person’s personal determination of what the truth is even though not a witness to the occurrence or part of a jury or even present during the entire courtroom proceeding including jury deliberations.

4.  Ignoring the rule of law and making stupid statements like those made by professional poverty pimp, Al Sharpton (who also wasn’t witness to the occurrence, part of the jury or even present during the entire courtroom proceeding including jury deliberations and who, if you remember, helped perpetuate the false allegations made by Tawana Brawley in 1987), “The acquittal of George Zimmerman is a slap in the face to the American people but it is only the first round in the pursuit of justice. We intend to ask the Department of Justice to move forward as they did in the Rodney King case and we will closely monitor the civil case against Mr. Zimmerman. I will convene an emergency call with preachers tonight to discuss next steps and I intend to head to Florida in the next few days.”

5.  Making such demands on the Department of Justice even though

previously filed FBI documents show agents had not turned up any accounts that Zimmerman, before the February 2012 shooting, exhibited racial bias.

6.  Rejecting our legal system by the likes of actress Sophia Bush who tweeted, “The wind is more than knocked out of me… My heart aches for this boy’s family. Justice System? I don’t think so. #justicefortrayvon.”

7.  Playing the race card whenever it’s convenient as in the case of actor and comedian Steve Harvey who tweeted, “A Child is Dead & The Man that Killed Him is Free & Again The Child is Black…My Country Tis of Thee?”

8.  Being outraged following the George Zimmerman verdict yet remaining silent about the black-on-black murder rate in Chicago and elsewhere throughout the United States.  According to what I read today, in the 513 days between the Martin-Zimmerman incident and the verdict, an astounding 11,106 blacks have been murdered by other blacks.

9.  Making race the focus of the Zimmerman trial, as the media did, while ignoring and failing to report on the trial of late-term abortionist Kermit Gosnell and his killing of innocent black babies.

I know my memory isn’t the greatest, but I really can’t recall any nationwide protests or vigils after O.J. Simpson was acquitted of killing Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman.  How come we didn’t hear demands on the Department of Justice to file civil rights’ violations against O.J. Simpson?  Why wasn’t the race card played after the verdict by white people demanding “justice for Nicole and Ron”?  No one is ever going to convince me that O.J. didn’t kill Nicole and Ron, but I wasn’t out there demanding “justice” and ignoring the jury verdict.  Everyone accepted the verdicts and moved on.

Bottom line on the definition of“justice”:  Even if you don’t know what happened, if you think or believe someone is innocent and they’re acquitted, justice was served;  if you think or believe someone is guilty and they’re acquitted, justice wasn’t served.  Unfortunately, justice, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

I don’t get it, but if you do, God bless you.