AL SHARPTON DODGES RACISM DEBATE AT OXFORD

AL SHARPTON DODGES RACISM DEBATE AT OXFORD UNION, WILL DELIVER PREPARED SPEECH

This Friday, the Oxford Union in London will hold a debate about race relations in the United States. MSNBC host Al Sharpton accepted an invitation to the event, but after confirming he would be one of the participants to propose the motion that the United States is “institutionally racist,” he did an about face, shocking his esteemed hosts.

Sharpton was supposed to defend his proposition along with Black Panther leader Aaron Dixon and liberal blogger Mychal Denzel Smith, while SiriusXM host, Breitbart News, and Fox News Contributor David Webb; conservative commentator Joe R. Hicks; and BBC radio host Charlie Wolf would oppose the motion in a structured Oxford-style debate.

wolf-web-hicks

The Oxford Union has committed to continue with the debate, which will be held this Friday, January 23rd. The debate details are on their website at oxford-union.org.

Sources have indicated that Sharpton, who is an informal adviser to both President Obama and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, has asked Oxford for an opportunity to speak but not debate the counter argument. “He wants to control the event, because he won’t debate the facts and the real issues including how his own conduct impacts race relations in the U.S.,” stated Webb. “He doesn’t want to be exposed for what he really is – a shakedown artist and racial coward. After years of conning people into giving him money by fanning the flames of racism, he’s just too afraid to have a civil, fact-based conversation about the issues of race in America.”

Oxford will allow Sharpton to speak for 20 minutes before the debate but will also have to answer questions from the audience, Webb, Hicks, and Wolf. The Oxford union, to its credit, is attempting to keep its history of fair debate intact. Webb was assured by the Oxford Union president Lisa Wehden that the opposing side will have an opportunity to ask questions of the Sharpton following his structured remarks. “It would be wrong to allow Sharpton to get away with just his usual thin, inflammatory rhetoric when this is supposed to be a substantive discussion,” said Webb.

Sharpton had a rough year in 2014, with criticism coming from all sides. Most recently, Sharpton’s comments following the Michael Brown and Eric Garner cases came under fire for creating a racially charged environment in New York and elsewhere that has pundits and citizens have alleged led to more violence against police across America. The New York Times investigated the long-rumored issue of tax evasion, claiming that Sharpton owes more than $4 million in back taxes. And, while Sharpton railed against law enforcement, The Smoking Gun reported that he was a paid FBI snitch in the 1980s.

The debate will be taped and aired on David Webb’s SiriusXM Patriot radio show Monday, January 26 at 9PM Eastern time. Additional coverage by Breitbart News, Fox News Network, and worldwide media is expected. The Oxford Union YouTube channel will have the full debate following its conclusion.

RIOT: ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT CONFERENCES OF OUR TIME.

RIOT: ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT CONFERENCES OF OUR TIME.

By Mario Murillo

riot strip

A fear runs deep in the heart of many leaders.  They are too scared to give it words.  They fear that the nation is incurable and destruction is inevitable.  So many freedoms have been destroyed.  So much resistance is coming against the faith.  So much silence is coming from American pulpits.  Some of the faithful are splashing around in puddles of giddy denial.  Others are hunkering down and hiding in a Christian Witness Protection Program.

Here comes a conference that is not afraid to speak the truth and point to supernatural solutions.  R.I.O.T.  is an acronym for REVIVAL IN OUR TIME.   The RIOT will fill a gaping hole in Christian conferences by being loving but firm, supernatural and practical.  RIOT will not just answer the questions about what is going on around us but will answer the questions about what is going to happen next.

Here are our speakers and the ministry they will bring to you in this conference.

Richard Summerlin: On the opening night of RIOT Richard Summerlin will shatter the myths about how so called millennials will not endure churches with fire and truth.  His congregation in Palm Coast Florida is unapologetically in revival and thrives with youth and young married couples.  Not only this, but Richard will expose the great reasons that 5 fold ministry is hindered in most churches.

You can hear Richard on Thursday night November 14th at 7PM and Friday morning November 15th at noon.

Sean Smith:  His courage to go directly into the campus culture with supernatural power has created a weapon.  He calls this weapon prophetic evangelism.  Sean calls us a sign.  Our witness to American youth, he says, must be an irresistible combination of culture piercing words and verification with signs and wonders.  Sean will take direct aim at discouragement and doubt and point the way to ignite gifts of power in your ministry.

You can hear Sean Smith on Friday night November 15th at 7PM.

Winkie Pratney:  He will add the lethal dose of insight to our past and to our future.  Winkie is considered by many to be the greatest living authority, on the history, the causes and the hindrances to revival.  The real power is not just his information but his gift of capturing the language of revival and sending off to war.  Be prepared to be revolutionized.

You can hear Winkie Pratney on Saturday November 16th at noon and again that night at 6 PM.

Finally, RIOT will not just be preaching but a collision with revival.  In each service it will be my honor to close the night with an utter expectation of the fire falling; not just any fire but the fire we need to save our nation.    I cannot say it strongly enough.  If you are on the West Coast pray about getting here for this historic conference.   If you know any leaders or believers that need this conference call them and warn them not to miss this! God bless you and God bless America!

new signature

P.S. All sessions are free of charge and childcare is provided.  Come early for the best seats.  

RIOT INSERT FOR BLOG

James Woods on Obama: He’s the ‘gift from hell’

James Woods on Obama: He’s the ‘gift from hell’

By Cheryl K. Chumley

The Washington Times

Thursday, September 12, 2013

  • James Woods copy

It’s a safe bet there’s no love lost between Hollywood actor James Woods and President Obama — the former has taken to Twitter several times over the last few months to trash the policies and politics of the latter.

The latest came this week, in response to a report from British press that revealed the National Security Agency commonly provides Israel with intelligence data — without first stripping out private and personal information on American citizens. The Guardian in London reported the item, the latest in its coverage of document leaks from Edward Snowden.

Mr. Woods unleashed his views of the matter — and of Mr. Obama’s role in allowing the practice to occur — on Twitter.

He wrote: “Report: Data on Americans shared with Israel … Obama: the gift from hell that keeps on giving.”

This is hardly the first unfavorable rating Mr. Woods has posted on his Twitter account about Mr. Obama. In July, the actor ranted over Mr. Obama’s insertion of his personal opinion into the George Zimmerman-Trayvon Martin trial, characterizing it as fueling racial tensions and wondering why the president would speak his mind about the death of the 17-year-old Trayvon but not worry so much about American’s soldiers and wounded warriors.

Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

WWII vet, beaten by two black teens outside Eagles Lodge, dies

Homicide-Suspect-1

WWII vet, beaten by teens outside Eagles Lodge, dies

Author: Ian Cull, KXLY4 Multimedia Journalist, ianc@kxly.com
Rob Kauder, Internet Content Manager, robk@kxly.com
Published On: Aug 22 2013 07:53:50 AM PDT   Updated On: Aug 22 2013 07:03:38 PM PDT
SPOKANE, Wash. -WWII veteran Delbert Belton survived being wounded in action during the Battle of Okinawa only to be beaten and left for dead by two teens at the Eagles Lodge in Spokane on Wednesday evening.

Belton, 89, succumbed to his injuries Thursday morning at Sacred Heart Medical Center.

Witnesses say Belton was in the parking lot of the Eagles Lodge at 6410 N. Lidgerwood, adjacent to the Eagles Ice-A-Rena, around 8 p.m. Wednesday when the two male suspects attacked him as he was about to head inside to play pool.

Police responded with K-9s to track the suspects’ scent but were not able to locate them.

“It does appear random. He was in the parking lot, it appears he was assaulted in the parking lot and there was no indication that he would have known these people prior to the assault,” Spokane Police Major Crimes Detective Lieutenant Mark Griffiths said.

Belton died from his injuries Thursday morning at Sacred Heart Medical Center.

“Shorty,” as he was known by his friends at the Eagles Lodge, served in the U.S. Army in the Pacific during WWII and was shot in the leg during the Battle of Okinawa. He went on to work at Kaiser Aluminum at the company’s Trentwood plant for more than 30 years. Belton’s wife passed away several years ago.

He loved playing pool, even though he claimed he was no good at it and had been a member of the Eagles Lodge for the last four months. In addition to playing pool he loved working on cars.

Shorty was Ted Denison’s best friend of 23 years; the two played pool occasionally and worked on cars daily.

“He was always there for me when I needed him,” Denison said. “We’d joke back and forth. We were always having fun, some sort of fun.”

He was the kind of nice old man who’d become your friend in minutes.

“Probably every time I come into town, he’d have a project for me to do,” Denison said. “I thought of him more as a dad than I did a friend really.”

Now, with the suspects still at large and the Spokane Police Department working to track them down, Shorty’s friends are hoping for justice.

“I don’t understand how somebody could do this. I really don’t,” Denison said.

Spokane police are looking for two male suspects in the attack. They said the suspects are African Americans between 16 and 19 years old. One suspect was described as heavy set and wearing all black clothing. The other was described as being about 6 feet tall and 150 pounds. There was no description of what clothing the second suspect was wearing other than a silk do-rag.

Police investigating the deadly attack on Belton have also obtained surveillance footage from the scene. Click this linkto see still images of the two suspects in the attack.

Peggy Noonan: Obama Got To Point Where People Stopped Listening To Him Faster Than Most Presidents.

Obama never thought that the nation would stop listening to him…but it has happened.

 

Peggy Noonan: Obama Got To Point Where People Stopped Listening To Him Faster Than Most Presidents

By Noel Sheppard | July 28, 2013 | 12:06

 896  856 Reddit12  29
A  A
Noel Sheppard's picture

“I think every president in the intense media environment we have now, certainly every two-term president, gets to a point where the American people stop listening, stop leaning forward hungrily for information. I think this president got there earlier than most presidents. And I think he’s in that time now.”

So said the Wall Street Journal’s Peggy Noonan on ABC’s This Week Sunday.

 GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, HOST: You are seeing (ph) more populist Democrats, I agree with that, but Peggy Noonan, you know, the president going back to the country one more time, it’s unclear that these speeches are doing much to move public opinion, much less Washington.PEGGY NOONAN, WALL STREET JOURNAL: Yes, I think that’s true. But when the White House calls it a pivot, somebody counted it up and said it’s probably the tenth pivot to the economy the president has done since he came in.

I noticed that in one of the speeches, it went over an hour. There was a heck of a lot jammed in. That tells me something. It said we’re not sure exactly what to say, so we’re going to say everything, but a speech about everything is a speech about nothing. Beyond that, I think every president in the intense media environment we have now, certainly every two-term president, gets to a point where the American people stop listening, stop leaning forward hungrily for information. I think this president got there earlier than most presidents. And I think he’s in that time now.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/07/28/peggy-noonan-obama-got-point-where-people-stopped-listening-him-faste#ixzz2aSJOaRqM

Mario’s note:

There are two ways to look at this:

1. Obama has failed so spectacularly, divided so completely, lied so consistently and broken laws so deliberately that it is hard to imagine how anyone can believe anything he says. 

2. With the media, education, Hollywood, and Unions protecting him and spinning his every failure with such total conviction and intimidation that it is hard to imagine how the message of his epic failure is finally getting through.

Whatever your stance, it remains a fact that America is tuning him out…finally.

Maybe now we can begin to cleanse the nation of pandemic corruption in the IRS, DOJ, NSA and find justice for the victims in Benghazi.

When Did Obama Decide That The Scandals He Once Thought Were Serious Are Now ‘Phony’?

When Did Obama Decide That The Scandals He Once Thought Were Serious Are Now ‘Phony’?

by Noah Rothman | 1:34 pm, July 25th, 2013VIDEO» 420 comments

On Wednesday, President Barack Obama set the tone for the debate surrounding the many controversies that have plagued his administration since the spring. The president called those scandals “phony” and denigrated those who find any worth in their investigation. But, as one prominent conservative opinion writer noted yesterday, it was not long ago that the White House was acknowledging the seriousness of the scandals he now derides as contrived.

“With an endless parade of distractions, political posturing and phony scandals, Washington has taken its eye off the ball,” Obama said during a marathon speech in Illinois.

During a panel segment on Fox News Channel’s Special ReportThe Weekly Standard editorStephen F. Hayes asked a pointed question about these so-called “phony scandals”: “Which of the scandals is phony?”

“The president has already acknowledged the seriousness of two of them – three of them, in one way or another,” Hayes added.

“This is part of the plan to set up an argument for the fall,” he said, identifying how Democrats will counter Republican charges of malfeasance by administration officials ahead of the 2014 midterms. In essence, Hayes implied, Obama and his supporters will accuse the opponents of his administration of a pathological desire to cling to already discredited conspiracy theories.

But Hayes is right to ask precisely which scandal Obama now finds “phony” that he or administration officials previously acknowledged were grave. Was he referring to the scandal surrounding the Internal Revenue Service’s targeting of conservative groups with undue scrutiny when seeking tax-exempt status?

“It’s inexcusable and Americans have a right to be angry about it — and I’m angry about it,” Obama said in May when IRS official Lois Lerner confessed to the targeting after planting a question about the affair with a member of the media at a routine press conference. “The fact of the matter is the IRS has to operate with absolute integrity.” Obama made these comments announcing from the White House that he had dismissed IRS personnel as a direct response to the accusations.

Nothing to see here, Obama’s supporters say. They point to newly revealed documents which purport to show that some liberal groups were targeted with scrutiny as well – though few have come forward to share their stories in the numbers that conservative groups have. But the National Review’s Eliana Johnson reports that IRS chief counsel William Wilkins, who the IRS said in a statement was not involved in the 501(c)(4) application process, “became aware of the targeting of tea-party groups at some point in 2012” according to the testimony of congressional witnesses. Wilkins did have regular contact with individuals in the White House, though whether he revealed what he knew about the targeting scandal to administration officials is not yet known.

Or maybe the president meant the scandal surrounding the administration’s response to the attack in Benghazi. Did he mean when the administration sent Susan Rice, then the United States’ ambassador to the United Nations, on every Sunday news programs to blame the attack on a spontaneous upraising resulting from an inflammatory YouTube video? A response which State Department officials testified seriously damaged American relations with the nascent post-Gaddafi Libyan government, and directly resulted in the delay of FBI investigative teams being able to access the scene of the attack. Which agency officials made the determination to send Rice out to make this claim remains unclear.

Americans also do not yet know who determined that minimal security for that threatened consulate was acceptable. “I am intent on making sure that we do everything we can to prevent another tragedy like this from happening,” Obama said in May, shifting blame for that lack of embassy security to a lack of funding and mismanagement by Congress. “But that means we owe it to them and all who serve to do everything in our power to protect our personnel serving overseas.”

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) later echoed this claim in a fiery speech on the Senate floor. Boxer’s claim, and Obama’s by extension, that Congress was to blame for the light security footprint in Benghazi was given three Pinocchios from Washington Post fact checker Glenn Kessler. During testimony before a congressional committee, one State Department official asserted that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton wanted to convert that temporary post in Benghazi into a permanent American diplomatic facility – she was to make this announcement in December of last year on a planned trip to Libya. Was this why the facility needed to be manned with high-level diplomatic personnel, including Libyan Amb. Chris Stevens, even though the consulate was not sufficiently hardened against attacks?

Or, perhaps, Obama was referring to the controversy surrounding the Department of Justice’s sweeping and overzealous efforts to intimidate government leakers and the journalists that would speak to them by unilaterally sweeping up the telephone records of Associated Press reporters and naming Fox News reporter James Rosen as a “co-conspirator” in an attempt to violate the Espionage Act.

This “phony scandal” resulted in a series of off the record meetings (which fast became on the record meetings after reporters began to boycott those credibility-endangering parlays) between journalists, media executives, and Attorney General Eric Holder. When the DOJ subpoenas story broke, Holder insisted that, while he had no direct involvement in the investigations, he took them “very seriously.” Earlier this month, the DOJ announced that it would rewrite the rules that govern how federal prosecutors and investigators seek secret warrants to prosecute criminal leaks.

It is perfectly understandable why the president and his supporters would want to dismiss as illegitimate these and other smoldering controversies. The president himself and senior administration officials initially recognized and acknowledged the severity and seriousness of the above scandals – their seriousness has not dissipated as their scope has broadened. As the various investigations into these infractions evolved, Obama and his supporters have become more aggressively contemptuous of those pursuing them and have attacked the motives of anyone who would seek to hold a frank discussion about these infractions. This is perhaps the most compelling indication that these and other scandals are anything but “phony.”

> >Follow Noah Rothman (@NoahCRothman) on Twitter

Poll: Race relations have plummeted since Obama took office

Poll: Race relations have plummeted since Obama took office.

1:11 AM 07/25/2013

Public attitudes about race relations have plummeted since the historic election of President Barack Obama, according to a new poll from NBC News and the Wall Street Journal.

Only 52 percent of whites and 38 percent of blacks have a favorable opinion of race relations in the country, according to the poll, which has tracked race relations since 1994 and was conducted in mid-July by Hart Research Associations and Public Opinion Strategies.

That’s a sharp drop from the beginning of Obama’s first term, when 79 percent of whites and 63 percent of blacks held a favorable view of American race relations.

Negative views on race relations have also increased substantially. According to the poll [pdf], 45 percent of whites and 58 percent African-Americans now believe race relations are very or fairly bad, compared with 2009, when  only 20 percent of whites and 30 percent of blacks held an unfavorable view.

Although the NBC/WSJ survey addressed the politically fueled Trayvon Martin controversy only obliquely (asking how the acquittal of George Zimmerman in Martin’s shooting death had affected respondents’ views of the legal system), the survey’s historical time frame — which shows the steepest declines in positives and increases in negatives coming in the last two years — suggests the firestorm over the Martin case played a role in diminishing the high solidarity between whites and blacks that was exemplified by Obama’s election.

By November 2011, three years after Obama’s election, only 22 percent of whites and 41 percent of African-Americans believed that race relations were fairly bad or very bad. Positive views have fallen correspondingly since November 2011, when 75 percent of whites and 57 percent of blacks said race relations were either good or very good.

Obama garnered intense criticism in March 2012 for weighing in on the shooting death of Martin, announcing, “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.” Obama went a step further in July 2013, after the acquittal of neighborhood watchman Zimmerman in Martin’s death, declaring, “Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago.”

As The Daily Caller reported, the Obama administration’s Justice Department sent a unit with a history of anti-white racial advocacy to Sanford, Florida to help facilitate protests in the area calling for Zimmerman’s prosecution in 2012, including a major rally headlined by activist Al Sharpton.

The bitter 2012 election, which saw Obama running on a stagnating economy and his supporters mounting intense attacks on challenger Mitt Romney, may also have contributed to the souring of race relations. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, which steadfastly supports the Obama administration, distributed pro-Obama election flyers in 2012 with lynching and Ku Klux Klan imagery.

Although these efforts may have helped boost African-American turnout to record levels and deliver the key states of Florida and Ohio to Obama, they do not appear to have done much for black Americans. The black unemployment rate in the United States is currently 13.7 percent, more than six points higher than the national unemployment rate, which stands at 7.6 percent.

Overall, the public’s view of race-relations has fallen back to levels reported in 1994 and 2007.

The increased division is a long way from the hope for improved race relations that fueled and accompanied Obama’s 2008 victory.

“It’s all about the coalition of the willing,” Michael Stewart, a progressive activist, told The Chicago Tribune in November 2009. “I’ve come to appreciate people as individuals, not by their race [and] there’s more a focus on what we have in common than what divides us.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/25/race-relations-have-plummeted-since-obama-took-office-according-to-poll/#ixzz2a58CwSe0

Detroit council supports calls for federal investigation of possible civil rights charges against George Zimmerman

Detroit council supports calls for federal investigation of possible civil rights charges against George Zimmerman

10:05 PM, July 23, 2013   |
 
Detroit City Councilwoman JoAnn Watson talks at a City Council meeting on Monday June 11, 2012. Watson sponsored a resolution passed by council supporting an NAACP petition seeking federal civil rights charges against George Zimmerman.

Detroit City Councilwoman JoAnn Watson talks at a City Council meeting on Monday June 11, 2012. Watson sponsored a resolution passed by council supporting an NAACP petition seeking federal civil rights charges against George Zimmerman. / Romain Blanquart/Detroit Free Press

By Joe Guillen

Detroit Free Press Staff Writer

The Detroit City Council on Tuesday unanimously passed a resolution calling for a federal investigation to see whether civil rights charges are warranted against George Zimmerman, who was acquitted July 13 of second-degree murder and manslaughter charges in the killing of Florida teen Trayvon Martin.

The resolution, sponsored by Councilwoman JoAnn Watson, sparked a discussion over the need for city leaders and others to focus more on violence in Detroit.

“We need to have that same level of outrage with respect to the black-on-black crime that takes place in our community,” Councilman Kenneth Cockrel Jr. said. “How many people were shot — maybe even shot and killed this past weekend in the city — mostly likely by folks who look just like them?”

Watson said there are many events held regularly to address violence in Detroit. “Because the so-called major media does not cover all of the expressions does not mean it does not happen,” she said. “So that’s not correct.”

 

CONFIRMED: Left Wing Plant at Houston Pro-Zimmerman Rally Is Far Left Activist.

CONFIRMED: Left Wing Plant at Houston Pro-Zimmerman Rally Is Far Left Activist.

Guest Post by Kristinn Taylor

LEFTIST PLANT INFILTRATES HOUSTON PRO-ZIMMERMAN RALLY– 
Liberal Media runs with it

A photo from the Houston pro-Zimmerman counter-rally of the NBPP anti-Zimmerman rally picked up by the AP shows a woman holding a sign that read, “Racist & Proud.”
racist proud plant
(New York Daily News – AP)

That looked incongruent with the other reports from the pro-Zimmerman side.
The NY Daily News, based on reporting from The Houston Chronicle, identified her asRenee Vaughan:

One woman in the Zimmerman group held a sign that said, “We’re racist & proud.”

Austin resident Renee Vaughan echoed the sign’s ugly sentiments by yelling, “We’re racist. We’re proud. We’re better because we’re white,” at the Martin group as they passed, according to the Chronicle.

The act to smear the Zimmerman supporters as racists with a leftist plant worked as the photo and comment was picked up and spread worldwide.

Scanning the internet we found that a “Renee Vaughn” from Austin worked for a far left environmental group, the Texas Campaign for the Environment.

Renee even has her photo linked to a far left environmental website.

Here are two photos of Renee Vaughan side-by-side:
rachel vaughan

Here’s another shot of Renee at a leadership event for community organizing.
She’s standing up front in the wild dress.
rachel eci

It looks like Renee Vaughan was definitely a racist leftist plant at the Houston rally.
renee vaughan busted

This is how the left operates, folks. This time they got busted.

UPDATE: Thanks to reader Karadion – here is a photo of Renee Vaughan with the same sunglasses she wore while holding the racist sign at the pro-Zimmerman rally.
ughan sunglasses

Yup. They’re the same sunglasses.
vaughan shades

UPDATE: Brandon Darby interviewed Renee Vaughan at the rally. She told him her sign means that “there are people here who are racist and apparently think that’s OK. I’m not one of them. I’m being sarcastic.”

What Do the Microscopic Rallies for Trayvon Mean?

microscopic

Roger L. Simon

by Roger L Simon

What Do the Microscopic Rallies for Trayvon Mean?

July 22nd, 2013 – 12:04 am

According to Reuters, in New York a grand total of 2000 people showed up Saturday to protest in favor of Trayvon Martin in the George Zimmerman trial. That’s .00024257 of the population of our most populous city. More New Yorkers show up for pizza at Ray’s between 6:00 and 6:05 in the evening. (Well, who knows? But you get my point.)

In our second most populous city, my hometown of Los Angeles, the results were even worse, according to the Los Angeles Times. A measly 400 people demonstrated. The totals in Miami, closest big city to the event, were 300.

In other words, the turnout was somewhere between minuscule and puny — maybe, at best, fifteen thousand people nationwide in a country of 314 million. (You do the math on that one…. Okay, I’ll do it. That’s .00005 of the population.)

Reuters and the New York Times blamed the weather for the low turnout, never ceasing to point out the summer heat and that many of the demonstrators brought umbrellas.

They didn’t bother to note that the estimates for recent anti-Morsi demonstrations in (usually rather warm) Egypt were some 16 million people in the streets — in a country with less than thirty percent the population of the U.S. Now that’s a demonstration!

So what are we to make of this astonishingly low attendance after non-stop coverage on cable news and elsewhere, as if this trial were the only serious issue confronting our country?

Could it be that the citizenry, including African-Americans, supposedly so greatly injured, have seen through the media hype (what I earlier called media pornography) and themselves realize this case is simply an accidental, anomalous one-off and not that big of a deal?

I certainly hope so, because what we have been going through is a form of national nervous breakdown, taking us rapidly backwards on race relations, something that has improved consistently in our country over the last fifty years.

What we do not need now is a “national conversation on race.” That’s like taking a scab that’s slowly healing and, just when it’s about to whither away, scratching it as hard as possible until the wound comes back.

We have strong civil rights laws. We have an even stronger national consensus against racism. Racist behavior is a huge social taboo, as it should be.

Now we should just leave it alone— let the scab heal. Morgan Freeman said this best in a famous interview with Mike Wallace on 60 Minutes back in 2006. (Unfortunately, the great actor rescinded this later. But I prefer to believe in this more sophisticated, calmer Morgan.)

Here’s a transcript of the key parts of that exchange:

MIKE WALLACE, CBS`s “60 MINUTES”: Black History Month, you find…

MORGAN FREEMAN, ACTOR: Ridiculous.

WALLACE: Why?

FREEMAN: You`re going to relegate my history to a month?

WALLACE: Come on.

FREEMAN: What do you do with yours? Which month is White History Month? Come on, tell me.

WALLACE: I`m Jewish.

FREEMAN: OK. Which month is Jewish History Month?

WALLACE: There isn`t one.

FREEMAN: Why not? Do you want one?

WALLACE: No, no.

FREEMAN: I don`t either. I don`t want a Black History Month. Black history is American history.

WALLACE: How are we going to get rid of racism until…?

FREEMAN: Stop talking about it. I`m going to stop calling you a white man. And I`m going to ask you to stop calling me a black man. I know you as Mike Wallace. You know me as Morgan Freeman. You`re not going to say, “I know this white guy named Mike Wallace.” Hear what I`m saying?

Yes, I hear you, Morgan. I hear you loud and clear and I know you were telling the truth. In fact, what you were saying is so important that it deserves being quoted again and again.

As one who has had the great fortune to travel the world and visit some sixty countries, the USA, in my view, is the least racist of all.

Is there still racism here? Of course. Will there always be? Most likely, humans being what they are.

But the best way to get rid of what remains is to shut up about it.

The sooner the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman affair disappears in the rear view mirror, the better for all of us.