Active Users
Currently 6 user(s) logged on.


Join Our Email List
Email:  
For Email Marketing you can trust


Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?




Red Mass Group on Facebook



About Us
FAQ
How To Format Posts
Email Us
RSS Feed
RMG Store
Fair Use Policy
2010 Tag Standards
2010 Candidate Profiles RMG Mobile Site

Search




Advanced Search


Event Calendar
July 2010
(view month)
S M T W R F S
* * * * 01 02 03
04 05 06 07 08 09 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
* * * * * * *
<< (add event) >>

Blog Roll
Mass. Conservatives
Ben Wetmore
Boston Maggie
Conservative's Conscience
The Capitol View Live
Critical Mass
Deval Patrick Watch
FreeRepublic - Massachusetts
Hub Politics
Mass Roots
Miss Kelly
New England Republican
No Looking Backwards
Notes from D.R. Tucker
Peter Porcupine
Save WRKO
Scaling the Hill
South Shore Republican Voice
Worcester Freedom Trail
Moonbats
Blue Mass Group
Berkshires Blog
Chimes at Midnight
Left in Lowell
MA lefty blogs
Progressive Mass.
Quriltai on the Shore
Libertarians
Beacon Hill Institute Blog
Pioneer Institute Blog
Campaign For Liberty
Cato at Liberty
Humble Libertarian
von Mises Blog
Ayn Rand Institue
Young Americans for Liberty
Hyper Local
My Dedham
Dracut Forum
Dracut Musings
Holyoke First
Hub Blog
ShrewsBuried
Talking Stoneham
Universal Hub
View From Plymouth Rock
Eric Dahlberg's Blog
Mass. Media
Conservative's Conscience
The Daily Briefing
Keller @ Large Blog
Ken Pittman
The Lone Republican
Political Intelligence
Pundit Review
Talking Politics
Commonwealth Unbound
Dan Kennedy
Greater Boston
Michael Graham
National
73 Wire
Ace of Spades
Big Hollywood
Daily Beast
Daily Kos
Daily Paul
Flynn Files
Hot Air
Little Green Footballs
National Review
Pardon My English
Reason - Hit & Run
Red State
Sudden Stop
Wonkette


The Chickens Come Home To Roost

by: D. R. Tucker

Fri Oct 12, 2007 at 03:19:42 AM EDT


( - promoted by Patrick)

Tomorrow is the funeral for Steven Odom, a thirteen-year-old African-American from Dorchester who was struck down last week by a bullet not meant for his body. Odom's murder has galvanized the city, horrifying Bostonians in a way few murders seem to do. It's a horror that will linger--but unfortunately, it will only linger for a limited time.

Yesterday, Odom's death became a politicized event, as Odom's parents held a press conference demanding that Governor Deval Patrick play an active role in stemming inner-city violence. The grief of Odom's parents is understandable--but sadly, their argument is absurd. There is little that Gov. Patrick, Boston Mayor Thomas Menino, or any other state or local public official can do to reduce the bloodshed in Boston.

One cannot avoid viewing the Odom tragedy against the backdrop of political and cultural changes that have destroyed Boston and other major cities in this country. Conservatives (and even some non-conservatives such as Bill Cosby) are shouted down when they criticize the lawlessness, disdain for education, and illegitimacy that has plagued America's urban regions--and because their criticisms are demonized as thinly veiled racism, their proposed solutions are ignored, and the violence continues unabated.

D. R. Tucker :: The Chickens Come Home To Roost
The "root cause" of inner-city violence in Boston and other areas must be laid squarely at the feet of LBJ's so-called Great Society--that deranged idea designed to keep poor people poor and black people trapped in the 'hood under the guise of helping them deal with life's difficulties. The Great Society was a great scam and hoax perpetrated upon inner-city blacks, a deceptive deal that convinced too many that a life of handouts and dependence was preferable to a life of hard work and diligence.

The Great Society encouraged fatherlessness and triggered the anti-education mentality that has gained far too much prominence among the urban underclass. With the rise of the Great Society came increased poverty, increased despair, increased hopelessness--and increased violence.

The liberal instinct is to shut up anyone who rightfully blames the Great Society for its cancerous contribution to urban sorrow. It is time to tell those liberals to shut up.

However, while it's said to be impolite to "blame the victim," there are times in which the victim must in fact be blamed. The "victim" in this case is not Odom, but the folks who have repeatedly voted for the same liberal politicians who created and contributed to the destruction of the inner city.

Odom happens to be a minister's son, and thus one can't help thinking about this tragedy in religious terms. Odom was let down by the members of his community--the ones who repeatedly voted to advance the destructive liberal agenda, the ones who ran to the polls every election day to express support for the likes of Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Michael Dukakis and others who either caused the destruction of the inner city through their support of dependency programs or who had no solutions for the problems facing urban areas.

I've long been mystified by the phenomenon of supposedly religious African-Americans putting their faith and trust in secular politicians who believe that the state is God. I've never understood how folks in depressed urban regions can continually vote for the likes of Kennedy and Kerry, how they can revere them as God-like figures.

Thus, I can't help wondering if, on some level, those who put their faith in these destructive politicians are not reaping what they have sowed. If members of Boston's inner city voted for those who either created or perpetuated the plight of the 'hood, it will be virtually impossible for these residents to receive much public sympathy when innocents are struck down as a result of the circumstances created or perpetuated by those wayward politicians.

It's sad that Steven Odom had to die. It's sad that so many promising young men and women died on the streets of inner-city Boston before they had a chance to reach adulthood. However, it is time for all of us to confront the truth: that inner-city Boston and other inner-city areas of this country were destroyed years ago by the Great Society--and that the politicians who created or perpetuated the Great Society, as well as the folks (including residents of these inner cities) who kept returning these corrupt politicians to office, have a hell of a lot to answer for.

We'll hear a lot of sound and fury over the next few years from Bostonians demanding that the violence be stopped, a lot of calls for men and women in inner-city Boston to be soldiers in a war against urban violence. However, if these men and women voted for the Kennedys and Kerrys and Dukakises and other fools who either created or perpetuated the suffering of the inner city, then these men and women will be, for all intents and purposes, phony soldiers.

My heart breaks for Steven Odom. However, my heart turns cold when I think of the sadistic solons who destroyed inner-city ambition with the horribly misnamed Great Society, and the folks who kept these politicians in power all these years. Steven Odom did not die in vain. However, it's clear that he died because of other people's sins.

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Thank you for writing this D.R. Tucker (0.00 / 0)
So very well said. 

I saw the family of Steven Odom on television and I was struck by the strength and dignity and abundant character they possessed.  The sister was a beautiful and courageous girl that lost a beloved brother to the senseless violence of the streets.  The father lost a special son.  The pain must be overwhelming and yet they were approaching it with great faith and I will pray for them.

The inner cities are erupting in violence and yet the "great society" offers us nothing but endless disconnected excuses.  The families of urban victims continue to vote for and support the very people that inprison them in this hopeless jungle.  The Kennedys, Kerrys, Dukakis' and Patrick's offer nothing new, but allow the inner city to remain a war zone in order to perpetuate their own political positions.  It is shameful.

The danger of building politicians into Gods is that they never fail to disappoint.  The Kerrys, Kennedys, Dukakis' and Deval Patricks of the world are only men, but they promise the blessings of a God.  "I will feed you, clothe you, teach you and support you" they say.  Yet, their own spotted personal histories are filled with murder, greed, cheating and hate.  When will America again place their faith in a real God and demand of men only what they can realistically provide?

The false promises of these liberal fascists will not go unpunished.  They will be held to account for their transgressions. 


This rant... (0.00 / 0)
....is nothing more than self serving clap trap.  Perhaps the reason why conservative criticism is at times decried as racist is because it is in fact almost always exclusively criticism without any substantive suggestions for affecting the changes the criticism invariably deems necessary.  Much like this entire impotent tome. 


Meet DR Tucker (5.00 / 1)

How exactly are his comments racist again?


Full Disclosure
http://www.redmassgroup.com/pr...


[ Parent ]
First of all.... (0.00 / 0)
....I didn't call his remarks racist, I called them self serving, impotent clap trap.  He, in his post, made statements about conservative criticism being dismissed as racist and I addressed that concern by stating that criticism without construction can be viewed as ill intended.  I knew what color Mr. Tucker's skin was when I made my comment, I have seen his picture before.

EaBo your credibility has been diminishing at an alarming rate since you started making unsupportable claims, misusing data and spinning things completely out of orbit.  Do not attribute things to me that I have not said.  I am waiting for an apology.


[ Parent ]
Gee shulty, (0.00 / 0)
it sure appears that you were characterizing DR's "conservative criticism" as racist, right after you called it self-serving claptrap. The former sentence follows the latter quite logically. Yoy might not have intended it, but that's the plain reading of your language.

By the way, I find the idea novel that criticism is per se illigitimate unless it proposes a preferable alternative. I think in many cases, the argument for the alternative is implicit in the criticism. For instance, when the Am-Am leadership pillory the likes of Clarence Thomas or other conservative blacks, they don't come out and say "they should instead be increasing our government programs"(or whatever) -- they just call them oreos or Uncle Toms and move on to the next meme.But their preferred alternative is apparent.

Perhaps the greatest criticism of the black culture ever made was Bill Cosby's -- not a conservative by any means, by the way -- and he is saying (more overtly, I grant) what DR's piece, I think, says implicitly.


[ Parent ]
No it wasn't.... (0.00 / 0)
....the plain reading of my language.  It was an inference drawn by EaBo and apparently, by you.  See what happens when people are more interested in drawing conclusions and in criticising without offering construction? You get misunderstandings and somehow the whole process breaks down. 

And the idea that criticism absent constructive input for improvement or alternative is hardly novel.  And as this little exchange has proven very quickly, relying on the assumption that the alternative is implied in the vaccuum is a bad idea.  First, because things can easily be misinterpreted, and second, becuause there is almost always more than one alternative.

What I am guilty of is not taking my own advice and supplying a constructive suggestion in my critique.  The fact that the omission was intentional to prove a point notwhithstanding, I will make up for that error now.

My respectful suggestion to Mr. Tucker is that in order not to become a mere cog in the broken machinery that he seeks to critcize, is that he list in at least some minute detail the better alternatives to the programs, policies, social structures and cultural mores that he feels are perpetuating the problems he is commenting on. Otherwise he is just pointing a finger.  Clearly that is something that is very easily misconstrued.

 


[ Parent ]
Yes a big thanks D.R. (0.00 / 0)
Excellent post D.R.

Your post clearly shows the results of the Great Society mentality.

ALL elections urban or otherwise that produce the same rubber stamp machine like results, will have the harsh reality of reaping what they sowed.

The whole state of mASS is proof of that. What will it take to wake people up!?

"From MY cold dead hands"


So everything was going just fine until the Great Society and LBJ? (0.00 / 0)
Is that the drivel that you're spewing?  Inner city violence was not a problem until the 60"s, fatherless families was not a societal issue until LBJ, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry and Mike Dukakis screwed up things. 

Tired old talking points that ignores facts and history, but fits into a nice simple rhetorical framsework that was nothing to do with relaity.


Can you give us a run down of the facts and history? (0.00 / 0)
My own meager understanding of things is that during the 60s crime skyrocketed as did out of wedlock births and related things for blacks.  Please give us your understanding of things.

---
Kamal Jain for State Auditor
http://www.kamaljain.com


[ Parent ]
Before the 60s... (0.00 / 0)
...if black people got out of line they were killed.  Thereafter they were just denied access to equality.  Is that what you are getting at?


[ Parent ]
I'm not getting at anything. (0.00 / 0)
I'd like to hear Festus' facts and history.  DR presented his take on things and Festus only alluded to his own take.  I would think you'd be somewhat sympathetic to the view that Festus should substantiate his criticism.



---
Kamal Jain for State Auditor
http://www.kamaljain.com


[ Parent ]
And what makes... (0.00 / 0)
...you think I am not sympathetic?  I am, but there is still no reason why I can't weigh in. 

[ Parent ]
Dr's main contention is: (0.00 / 0)
"The "root cause" of inner-city violence in Boston and other areas must be laid squarely at the feet of LBJ's so-called Great Society" and I'm foolish enough to suggest that urban crime and other issues (like the split families) existed long before the Great-Society.

Patrick, I have enough respect in you to assume you have a basic grasp of history to understand the impact on urbanization and crime that bagan...oh around the Middle Ages.

As for out-of-wedlock births, just a quick google finds this social problem being discussed in the US in the 1930s

Forgive me for making what I took as an obvious statement: that today's urban violence is not "rooted" in the Great Society, but has a centuries old legacy.  Yes, the overall crime rate (and therefore urban crime rates) did increase in the late sixties into the 80's and it is attributed to the baby boomer entering and then growing out of the ages when they tend to commit crimes.

I know conseratives loved to blame all our social problems on liberal programs and "The Great Society" is the # 1 target.  But where is DR's or your facts to back that up?  Just because it has been accepted as common wisdom in conserative circles does not make it true.

You (or atleast DR, becuase he made the ascertain) have the responsiblity to PROVING that the Great Society programs are at the ROOT (which is defined as: the source or origin of a thing) of inner city violence.


[ Parent ]
PROVING it? (0.00 / 0)
To whom, you??? Impossible.

This is not on the violence topic, but there is plenty of meat to dig into here -- just as a means of putting some historical perspective on the marriage, divorce and unwed birth rates.


[ Parent ]
And as for crime, (0.00 / 0)
this provides historical data on rates of crimes, murders, imprisonments, drug arrests, etc etc.

We can argue all day about what "caused" these developments, and no one is going to come to agreement on what the "factual proof" is as to causation.

That's why we have politics and liberals and conservatives.

But I'd sure argue all day long that the increases in divorce, illigitimate births, drug use and crime just happen to coincide with a liberalization of the laws that govern them.


[ Parent ]
The problem with your contention. (0.00 / 0)
No one is suggesting that crime, illegitimate births, and social problems didn't exist prior to the 60s.  They did.  However they simply didn't exist to the extent they did after the 60s.  The numbers in the Moynihan Report were at the time shocking, but now seem quaint by comparison.

Which is more plausible, that current social problems are caused by the urbanization that occurred during the Middle Ages, or that the problems have something to do with economic policies and cultural changes that preceded the spike?  It's an Occam's Razor thing.

---
Kamal Jain for State Auditor
http://www.kamaljain.com


[ Parent ]
It is..... (0.00 / 0)
....certainly not an either or situation but rather a result of many factors which include the reality of urbanization in general which is historically tied, of course, to the middle ages (which is clearly contextual and not causative), and the massive population spike that was also mentioned (actually causative) and a large variety of other political, economic and social realities only some of which could be attributed to the "great society" initiatives.  Poverty, crime, violence, etc. are not partisan issues.  Everyone is to blame in some regard.  But tossing out a blanket "great society" is to blame statement without any substantiation is no more intellectually honest that suggesting that it all started in the 1200s.


[ Parent ]
What is the main point DR is making? (0.00 / 0)
Your point that "no one is suggesting that...social problems didn't exist prior to the 60's" is exactly what DR's post is about.  The "root" of all evil is the Great Society policies.  That is the essence of DR's essay.  I counted nine times in which he blamed either the Great Society or liberal politicians (the Kennedy, Dukakis, Kerry cabal) for all of the urban ills that exist, without mentioning any other historical cause.

It is easy to get into a layered discussion of why crime exists, why the crime rate went up, down and appears to be trending up again.  Certainly we could spend days providing countless links debating the break down in family.  And that would fly in the face of DR's wholly simplistic thesis that the liberals and the Great Society is the root blame of our urban ills.

That contention is the right wing drool that is at the bed rock of modern conservatism.  Obviously the Great Society did not end poverty, but many of the programs started in this era--Head Start certainly comes to mind--did help many Americans in poverty with a small lift and onto a road of productive citizenship.  At the same time we can site failures in other Great Society programs and hopefully learn from mistakes.  But such an earnest discussion about the Great Society programs is not what conservatives want.  They want a liberal piƱata to whack around and that was the root of DRs post.


[ Parent ]
You are injecting your own biases into DRs piece. (0.00 / 0)
Historical causes are irrelevant to his argument.  DR is looking at a specific change that occurred irrespective of the general problems of urban life.

There is more to this than an inch deep talking point.  To characterize it as such shows that you only want to quickly dismiss it rather than dig deeper and run the risk of having it topple some of your preconceptions.  Books have been written on this subject.  Don't pretend that no one has explored it in depth.



---
Kamal Jain for State Auditor
http://www.kamaljain.com


[ Parent ]


Adverstise here for as low as $60 per week.





Local Feeds 

Stat Counter

 
Red Mass Group is owned and operated by Robert Eno. It is not authorized or paid for by any candidate or committee.
HOME
Powered by: SoapBlox