2-N-1: Why The Election Fraud in Arizona Matters & The Racial Double Standard in How the MSM Portrays Violence

'The Establishment Loves Voter Suppression'

My first two posts for this blog back in February were about voting and the history of voting rights (click HERE and HERE for the link to those blog entries). Already we are seeing the negative effects of the Supreme Court's gutting of the Voting Rights Act in 2013. Specifically, it would have prevented election officials in Arizona from dramatically decreasing the number of polling places in Maricopa County...the largest county in the state. If incrementalism is possible (and I don't believe it is), then we should be seeing a much needed incremental updating of the VRA of 1965. However the mere fact that the assault on voting rights has largely gone unmentioned in the democratic primary up until this point should be a major red flag. However the establishment loves voter suppression and always has. Click the above link to the blog entry I wrote on the history of voting rights and voter suppression. There has always been an agenda to limit the political power of certain groups in this country. The establishment has every reason to want to look the other way now given the fact that so many young voters are openly supporting socialism and radical policy changes. This election in 2016 is the first in 50 years where we've had an election without full voting rights and there are already problems and anomalies that have arisen in the primaries. Who still thinks incremental change is going to fix the system?

One of the biggest threats to the current status quo is the prospect that the American people will vote radicals into power. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing as long as we're talking about progressive radicals who want to strengthen equality and freedoms and not right-wing radicals who dare I say want to do away with those things or limit the effectiveness of it to actually help people. There have been reports that on the Democratic side, voter drives have been down and there has been a very weak 'Get Out the Vote' drive in the party in general. Could that be because that doesn't help Hillary Clinton because most young voters don't support her? While that is not technically fraud, it does go to show you the mindset of the political establishment that is willing to go to make sure certain types of people are not involved in the process. Now I'm sure if asked they will say that they "obviously" want any and all people to vote. However if that be the case then why wasn't there an issue made of thousands of Black votes being thrown out in Florida in 2000? Why is there no issue made of determining elections by using provably hackable voting machines with zero paper trail? There are more questions than answers and the days of feigning ignorance are quickly coming to an end.

Going forward we have to be radical on the issue of voting rights. Quite frankly, I don't even know what the incrementalist answer to the V.R.A. is. There is no discussion whatsoever about trying to get Section 5 re-instated and as of yet, no one knows where Barack Obama's Supreme Court pick, who by all accounts is a conservative, is on the issue. So as of right now, I don't think there even is an incrementalist approach technically and given the statements I made above I think it's possible this problem could continue for some time. I can tell you what the radical approach is though, which should be supported by most people...especially Democrats. The radical approach is to not only re-instate section 5, but to also upgrade the bill to add new protections against voter ID laws and possibly a provision to force these voting machines to print out a paper trail. Something that is looong overdue.


'You can't incite violence against people exercising their rights as Americans and expect them to sit down and take it lightly'

Violence is portrayed very different in America depending on the race and/or religion of the person or group doing to violence. Look at how differently riots done by Whites after a bowl game or when a beloved coach is let go as in the case of Joe Paterno and the fallout of the abuse scandal that rocked Penn State some years back are portrayed. Then look at how non-violent Black protests are portrayed. When it comes to Black people standing up for themselves and against what are often at the very least gross injustices if not outright human rights violations, the reaction is incendiary and vitriolic on the part of the mainstream network media. It should be obvious at this point that the mainstream media (MSM) does not represent the views of the people and only look to protect and shield the establishment from accountability. 

Donald Trump has made comments on the campaign trail that show how fragile his ego is when he says he wishes he could punch protesters and encourages his supporters to attack people via stating he'd "pay their legal fees." It has turned his rallies into justified targets of protest. You can't incite violence against people exercising their rights as Americans and expect them to sit down and take it lightly. Yet look at how quickly once again the MSM flipped the narrative against the protesters in Chicago! All of a sudden it became about what they were doing wrong and some even attempted to make bogus claims about Trump's freedom of speech being impaired which is bullshit quite frankly. Like in the case of KKK rallies, often times the counter rally is larger than the KKK rally itself. What happened in Chicago was very similar to a KKK rally. The anti-racists, the anti-bigots, the anti-fascists showed up and drowned out the people who were there to support Trump. One side lost out because Trump had to cancel. It's as clear as that. Yet notice how quickly the media makes the problem about the protesters. The people there to show their love of equality and liberty...they were the problem. Not the guy who came out to tell all of his supporters about how "those people" were the problem and if he became President he'd do this, that and a third to keep them in control.

Make no mistake, in this election there has been one violent side and that is the right-wing who have attacked protesters in now numerous events since the campaign season started. Does Trump get called out for this? Well the MSM has made an issue out of it, but strangely the same vitriol spewed towards Black Lives Matter is missing from the "in-depth" and "contextualized" discussions about violence at Trump rallies. Right-Wing violence in America in general is swept under the rug whereas Black-on-Black crime and threats of terrorism by Islamic extremists seem to get more attention. It is obvious to see the glaring case of white privilege and racial biases at play here. I think it honestly goes beyond the MSM though. The establishment doesn't want to do anything about the threat of right-wing violence and most members of Congress bend over in their support for the NRA preventing any real changes to the ease at which people are able to obtain firearms. It's a real and genuine domestic clusterfuck of a problem. So why has the media given Trump a pass for inciting violence? They've given him a pass because he's a right-winger in a country that is dominated by right-wingers and right-wing policies and agendas. So violence committed by vague representatives of this side of the aisle will always be played down. That's why this blog exists right now.

Who stands to gain the most from the MSM's kid gloves portrayal of Trump's campaign? Well of course the MSM does. They usually do well during election cycles due to increased viewership and increased viewership means more ad revenue, but what is happening now goes beyond making a buck. What we are witnessing is corporate media in America sell their souls for access. They fear losing access to Trump the most and in all likelihood Trump has genuine support from within the media infrastructure. If fascism ever comes to America, you better believe it'll come via a hot plate of propaganda served up to you by the plutocratic oligarchy who will try to tell you that fascism is good. They will try to say that fascism is democratic if it is voted in and that anyone who stands up to fascism is "anti-American." Fascism will become part of who we are and don't expect the MSM to do a damn thing to stop it.

Still Think We Don't Need a Political Revolution? The Implications of the Panama Papers Leak

Still Think We Don't Need a Political Revolution? The Implications of the Panama Papers Leak

These 4 Reasons Are Why Blacks Shouldn't Miss the Boat called the Marijuana Industry

These 4 Reasons Are Why Blacks Shouldn't Miss the Boat called the Marijuana Industry