Getting Fired For Doing Your Job

On Friday Guy Benson at Townhall posted an article about the recent firing of the police chief in Portsmouth, Virginia. The police chief was fired for doing her job.

The article reports:

This story out of Virginia is really quite something. If I’m understanding it correctly, it very much appears as though the city’s (Black, female) police chief was placed on administrative leave and then fired as retaliation for her investigation and attempted prosecution of criminal activity related to “Black Lives Matter” protests in the wake of George Floyd’s killing. The only attempt at a justification for the firing I’ve found is that perhaps she was overzealous in the charges she pursued, and even that critique is disputable. There is also “an unspecified conflict of interest” that has not been established or expounded upon. Her real supposed transgression, it would appear, is that she sought to hold prominent people accountable for illegal acts — resulting in punishment for her because said prominent people believe, apparently correctly, that they’re above the law.

The article quotes an NBC report:

The police chief of Portsmouth, Virginia, was fired Monday in what she suggested was a politically motivated move moments before criminal charges were dropped against a prominent state senator and several local Black leaders accused of conspiring to damage a Confederate statue during a protest this year. The latest twist in the case involving state Sen. Louise Lucas, a high-ranking Democrat who is Virginia’s most senior Black legislator, drew praise from members of her own party who condemned the charges. Portsmouth police in August charged Lucas and 18 other plaintiffs, including a school board member and members of the local NAACP chapter and the public defender’s office, with conspiracy to commit a felony and injury to a monument in excess of $1,000.  When Greene, who is Black, later announced the charges, she said Lucas and others “conspired and organized to destroy the monument as well as summon hundreds of people to join in felonious acts.” According to the police version of events in a probable cause summary, Lucas was with a group of people who were shaking cans of spray paint, and she told police that they were going to vandalize the statues “and you can’t stop them … they got a right, go ahead!”  At the Portsmouth protest, demonstrators managed to rip off the heads of some of the city’s Confederate statues while toppling another statue, which police said fell on and critically injured a demonstrator.

Here we see another example of laws that only apply to the ‘little people.’ The person who should be fired (impeached, actually) is the State Senator, who should be charged with inciting violence. The police chief was merely trying to administer justice equally–something many Democrats strongly oppose.

Something To Consider Before You Vote

Yesterday Fox News posted an article that included some recent statements by Vice-Presidential nominee Kamala Harris.

The article reports:

Peaceful protests against racial injustice are critical for the nation’s progress and help to keep law enforcement in check, Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., said Friday.

That is a perfectly valid statement. The original civil rights marches in the 1960’s were non-violent on the part of the protesters. Unfortunately I cannot say the same about some of the police. Now things seem to be reversed. Protesters think they can smash windows, steal things, and set things on fire. That is not a protest–that is a crime.

The article continues:

“Nothing that we have achieved that has been about progress, in particular around civil rights, has come without a fight, and so I always am going to interpret these protests as an essential component of evolution in our country — as an essential component or mark of a real democracy,” the vice presidential nominee said during the NAACP’s national convention.

She added that protests were “necessary” as “the people’s voices must be heard, and it is often the people who must speak to get their government to do what it is supposed to do, but may not do naturally unless the people speak loudly — and obviously peacefully.”

Harris also praised the “brilliance” and “impact” of “Black Lives Matter,” which has received media praise but also come under fire for promoting left-wing stances like opposing the nuclear family. “I actually believe that ‘Black Lives Matter’ has been the most significant agent for change within the criminal justice system,” she said.

Black Lives Matter has recently scrubbed their website. However, on September 8, I wrote an article that included some quotes from a “What We Believe” page that was then on their website. I apologize for not taking a screenshot (it didn’t occur to me that they would take down the page)–I just copied the quotes. That page no longer exists on their website. When you read the following quotes from the page, you might make an educated guess as to why:

We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.

We foster a queer‐affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking, or rather, the belief that all in the world are heterosexual (unless s/he or they disclose otherwise).

It has been widely reported that the people behind Black Lives Matter have Marxist roots. That is true. It is disturbing to see a candidate for one of the highest offices in the land support an organization that has Marxist ties. This candidate belongs to a political party that falsely accused President Trump of ties to Russia and tried to remove him because of those charges. Now they want us to vote for someone who openly supports a Marxist organization. That kind of double standard makes my head hurt.

Political Impact

In May, George Floyd died, allegedly at the hands of a police officer who used excessive force. The nation agreed that his death was due to over zealousness on the part of the police. Recently, the full videos came out of the incident which cast doubt on what was initially reported. The coroner’s report also casts doubt on what was initially reported. Nevertheless, the death of George Floyd set off riots almost instantly in a number of cities in America. Oddly enough, the cities most affected were controlled by Democrats and in many cases minorities. The rioting made no sense. More than that, the fact that you had large groups suddenly appear almost out of nowhere in these cities was also troubling. Well, we have had three months of rioting in many cities. It’s not protesting when people are throwing bricks and setting things on fire. I am not sure why the media is still calling these events protests. So what is the political impact of this chaos?

Breitbart posted an article today that provides some interesting information.

The article notes:

In a statewide poll conducted between June 14 and June 18, the Marquette Law School Poll showed 61 percent of Wisconsin voters approved of the Black Lives Matter protests, while 36 percent disapproved of those protest. By a margin of 25 points, more Wisconsin voters approved of BLM than disapproved of BLM.

That same Marquette Law School poll conducted in Jun showed Joe Biden leading Donald Trump by 6 points in the state, 50 percent to 44 percent.

In a subsequent statewide poll conducted between August 4 and August 9, the Marquette Law School Poll saw approval drop 13 points, from 61 percent to 48 percent, while disapproval jumped by 12 points, from 36 percent to 48 percent. Stunningly, the net margin of approval versus disapproval among Wisconsin voters of BLM has dropped from plus 25 to zero in just two months.

That same Marquette Law School Poll conducted in August showed that Joe Biden leads Donald Trump by 5 points in the state, 49 percent to 44 percent.

The article concludes with the following:

In June, 59 percent of white voters approved of the Black Lives Matter protest, while 38 percent disapproved. In August, approval among white voters dropped precipitously to 45 percent, while disapproval increased to 51 percent.

In contrast, there was virtually no change of approval for Black Lives Matter among black or Hispanic voters between the June poll and the August poll.

In June, 77 percent of black or Hispanic voters approved of the Black Lives Matter protests, while 19 percent disapproved. In August, 78 percent of black or Hispanic voters approved of the Black Lives Matter protests, while 20 percent disapproved.

There was also a significant disparity of voter attitudes by geographic region within the state.

If black lives matter to Black Lives Matter, why are they burning down black businesses and the businesses of people who claim to support them?

The First Amendment Only Applies When It Is Convenient

Red State Observer posted an article yesterday about some recent actions by Mayor Lori Lightfoot of Chicago.

The article quotes the Chicago Tribune:

Lori Lightfoot defended the Chicago Police Department’s ban on protesters being able to demonstrate on the block where she lives, telling reporters Thursday that she and her family at times require heightened security because of threats she receives daily.

Lightfoot refused to elaborate on the specific threats, but said she receives them daily against herself, her wife and her home. Comparisons to how the Police Department has protected previous mayors’ homes, such as Rahm Emanuel’s Ravenswood residence, are unfair because “this is a different time like no other,” Lightfoot told reporters.

“I think that residents of this city, understanding the nature of the threats that we are receiving on a daily basis, on a daily basis, understand I have a right to make sure that my home is secure,” Lightfoot said.

Doesn’t anyone else have the right to make sure that their home is secure? It seems to me that the mayor’s job is to protect all of the citizens–not just herself.