Can You Name The Party?

A case of corruption in Bell, California today reached is conclusion with the conviction of 5 ex city employees, including the mayor, who used the city treasury to enrich themselves beyond all reasonable measures. Funny thing though, in most if not all, main stream media reporting, their party affiliation is not identified:

(Reuters) – Five former elected officials from the scandal-plagued California city of Bell were convicted on Wednesday of misusing municipal funds by collecting exorbitant salaries in a case that drew national attention as a symbol of public corruption.

Now I can guarantee you that had these folks been Republicans, that fact would have led each story in the head line. Fact is though these ex officials are all Democrats, so it’s just another case of media malpractice which continues to misinform and mislead the low information voter. Because of this malpractice, we have so many liberal heads full of garbage as to what constitutes conservatism, that it may take decades to actually cut through and penetrate the bone deep ignorance of so many, but that will have to begin with a press that is willing to be objective rather than hyper partisan and emotionally charged. I am not holding out any hope. As it is, this story will just fade away, and little concern will be expressed by those liberals who profess to care so much for the middle class, who in this case were completely taken advantage of. Waiting for condemnation and outrage from our resident liberals.


20 thoughts on “Can You Name The Party?

  1. Cluster March 21, 2013 / 3:41 pm


    The point is that in all of the MSM reporting, ie; AP, CBS, NBC, ABC, NYT, LAT, etc., etc. The party affiliation of the convicted city officials was not mentioned.

    It’s that reading comprehension thing.

    • neocon01 March 21, 2013 / 4:34 pm

      The Long, Sad, Violent History of Democrats’
      Racial Hatred for Blacks

      Perry Drake
      May 2003

      It has always seemed unnatural and unwise to me whenever I hear someone who’s been slandered by a particularly egregious lie reply that they’re not going to dignify that accusation with a response.

      For it has always been crystal clear to me that whenever your honor, integrity and reputation are called into question that you should be quick, thorough and – when circumstances demand – quite loud in defense of them.

      Otherwise, people will assume that the accusation must carry some weight and the falsity levied against you just might end up sticking.

      That’s what has happened to the political party that I belong to – the Republicans. For decades the Party of Lincoln has been under almost constant assault for being “racist” and “openly hostile” to blacks.

      However, nothing could be further from the truth – but you would never know it by the party’s spineless, practically nonexistent defense of its record on race and civil rights.

      From the days of Lincoln until the present, blacks have had no better friend, party-wise, than the Republicans. Since its inception in the mid-19th century, the GOP has built an exemplary record on civil rights, particularly if you want to use the Democrat Party as a comparison.

      The party’s first president, Abraham Lincoln, issued the Emancipation Proclamation on Jan. 1, 1863, the height of the Civil War, squelching any chance that the European powers of the day would intervene in the conflict in favor of the Confederacy. With the stroke of his pen, Lincoln destroyed the last real hope the Confederacy had for a victory.

    • neocon01 March 21, 2013 / 4:39 pm


      If race doesn’t matter in people why does party affiliation matter in a local corruption case?

      maybe they read the stats……..

      One example being “Whites” sometimes including Hispanics. Another is not adjusting for that the different racial groups differ in population size.
      The report reviews the more accurate statistics that is available and describes many large differences in crime rates between races. The report also examines the research on possible bias against racial minorities in the justice system and the police and concludes that bias not a significant explanation for the different racial crime rates.[3]

      It major findings were stated as:[3]

      Blacks are seven times more likely than people of other races to commit murder, and eight times more likely to commit robbery.

      When Blacks commit crimes of violence, they are nearly three times more likely than non-Blacks to use a gun, and more than twice as likely to use a knife.(see chi cago)

      Hispanics commit violent crimes at roughly three times the white rate,
      and Asians commit violent crimes at about one quarter the White rate.
      The single best indicator of violent crime levels in an area is the percentage of the population that is Black and Hispanic.
      Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving Blacks and Whites, Blacks commit 85 percent and Whites commit 15 percent.
      Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks. Forty-five percent of their victims are white, 43 percent are Black, and 10 percent are Hispanic. When Whites commit violent crime, only three percent of their victims are Black.
      Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against a White than vice versa, and 136 times more likely to commit robbery.
      Blacks are 2.25 times more likely to commit officially-designated hate crimes against whites than vice versa.
      Only 10 percent of youth gang members are white.
      Hispanics are 19 times more likely than whites to be members of youth gangs. Blacks are 15 times more likely, and Asians are nine times more likely.
      Between 1980 and 2003 the US incarceration rate more than tripled, from 139 to 482 per 100,000, and the number of prisoners increased from 320,000 to 1.39 million.
      Blacks are seven times more likely to be in prison than Whites. Hispanics are three times more likely.

      The report also stated that between 2001 and 2003 there were an average of 15,400 Black-on-White rapes. The number of White-on-Black rapes were unclear. Counting some Hispanics as Whites, there were 900 “White”-on-Black rapes. Blacks were 7.2 time more likely to commit interracial rape even after controlling for differences in population size and for the higher general rate of rape for Blacks. This may suggest a deliberate targeting of Whites.[3]

      There were 10,000 gang-rapes by Blacks against Whites between but not a single “White”-on-Black gang rape.[3]

      A common myth is that Whites are more likely to commit white-collar offenses. Actually, Blacks are 3-5 times more likely than Whites to be in prison for fraud, bribery/conflict of interest, racketeering, and embezzlement.[3]

      A large number of studies have examined the relationship between percentage of Black population in an area and crime. Almost all have found a higher percentage of Blacks in the area to be associated with more violent crime and most have found such a relationship with other types of crimes.[1]

      Only 0.3% of reported interracial crimes are classified as official “hate crimes”. This classification has been argued to be arbitrary and biased against Whites. Despite this Blacks commit 2.25 times more official hate crimes against Whites and Hispanics than the reverse. The media has been argued to give undue emphasis to official hate crimes as compared to the much more common interracial crimes in general as well as having a bias towards reporting the more uncommon White-on-Black crimes.[4][3]
      As of 2001, the chances of going to only State or Federal prison in percentages for various demographic groups. The lifetime chance for Black males was around 1/3.[5]

      For men in their early thirties, Blacks are about 7 times more likely to have a prison record than Whites. They are more likely to have been in prison (22.4 percent) than in the military (17.4 percent) or in college. 12.5 percent have a bachelor’s degree. The results are related on educational achievement. 30 percent of those without college education and nearly 60 percent of high school dropouts had prison records.[6]

      Oi Vey!!

    • tiredoflibbs March 21, 2013 / 5:31 pm

      Notice bloch claiming that “If race doesn’t matter in people why does party affiliation matter in a local corruption case?”

      Her own posts on her pathetic blog in the land of make believe use race and party affiliation at any chance she can get.

      She ignores news against Democrats (unless they don’t strictly follow the party line), any crimes committed by minorities (she only points out crimes by whites especially perceived Christians) and controversies by Christians while ignoring crimes and medieval punishments by Islamofascists.

      Typical and pathetic.

    • neocon01 March 21, 2013 / 5:51 pm

      OOH Noooooo

      White and Wrong in Philly
      By Selwyn Duke

      When your article inspires a big-city mayor to refer your case to a “human-relations commission,” you know you’ve hit a nerve. And when that article is the recent “Being White in Philly” piece by liberal Robert Huber, you know it doesn’t take much truth to hit that nerve.

      That’s the scary part. Huber’s article contains mostly tepid examples of whites’ negative experiences with blacks and primarily black neighborhoods,

      Read more:

    • neocon01 March 21, 2013 / 5:53 pm


      the donks cant tell an EXIT from an ENTRANCE……..let alone politics…..

    • Jeremiah March 22, 2013 / 5:19 am

      Note to moderators: If Sarah brings up race one more time, you should delete it. This race pap is getting old.

      Thanks for the advice Jeremiah but all posts from all of the pitchfork crowd are deleted when we see them. We have tried letting them back on the blog when they have returned with acceptable content but inevitably within a post or two they all return to their bigotry regarding race, religion and conservatism. Posters never remember this and respond to pitchfork posts so their footprints remain on the blog but we are tired of reminding you to ignore them until we can get their posts removed so you are responsible for making sure their presence remains even after they are removed themselves. // Moderator

      • Jeremiah March 22, 2013 / 5:56 pm

        all posts from all of the pitchfork crowd are deleted

        That’s good. I’m glad to hear that.

        Posters never remember this and respond to pitchfork posts so their footprints remain on the blog but we are tired of reminding you to ignore them until we can get their posts removed so you are responsible for making sure their presence remains even after they are removed themselves.

        Well, I very seldom if ever respond to their comments, though I see they receive a lot of responses from other folks here. I won’t respond to the forker bunch, they don’t deserve anything from anyone.

  2. mitchethekid March 21, 2013 / 5:23 pm

    Don’t ever post anything like that again

    • Cluster March 21, 2013 / 5:58 pm

      You know I will be honest with you Mitch. I do have your email address, and was considering sending you a personal email, but after that comment, I am hesitant to do so. I know how vile some liberals can be and that comment exposed a side of you that seems a little unbalanced.

      • neocon01 March 21, 2013 / 6:07 pm

        seems vacuum wing lil bmitch the PILE-IT has joined-together with the forkers….

      • neocon01 March 21, 2013 / 6:11 pm


        the agent provocateur TROLLS usually come here posing as moderates “just attempting dialog and find common ground”……..Uh Huh. It doesnt take long for their stink to catch up with them and expose who and what they really are.

      • neocon01 March 21, 2013 / 7:16 pm


        FRESH …..from the fork

        mitchethekid Says:
        20/03/2013 at 21:03

        Good for you Sarah! And thanks for being a B4V friend. Feel free to defend me any time you want. It will piss off most of the natives there; few as they are.
        I have been a regular poster there since it’s inception as a totem to GWB,

        but within the past few days I decided to take a different approach.

        I noticed that Cluster was saying things that seemed to be more reasonable so I did my best to befriend him. I think I have been successful. As you may have noticed, he and I have found some common ground on issues, who we respect as comedians and who we scoff at as representatives of reactionary conservatism. i.e $arah Payme.

        ******** Frankly, my ultimate goal is to have this Neo person shamed, humiliated and ultimately banned.******
        A few yrs ago I used to taunt him by calling him Rumplestiltskin but i don’t think he knew anything about that Fairy story.

        Amazona is another denizen whom I’d like to see a psychological profile on.

        The words she uses to negatively portray posters (such as us) and her obsession with spelling, syntax and etiology is quite revealing; IMO.
        Anyway, just thought I’d say hello and to thank you. BTW, I enjoy the nakedness here. I have always been a huge fan of the female figure.

    • neocon01 March 21, 2013 / 7:56 pm

      Déjà vu all over again

      mitchethekid March 21, 2013 at 5:23 pm #

      Don’t ever post anything like that again

      mitchethekid November 16, 2012 at 3:07 pm #

      Vulgar language and ageism. You will be removed from the blog if you continue posts like this. //Moderator

  3. Cluster March 21, 2013 / 6:10 pm

    If race doesn’t matter in people why does party affiliation matter in a local corruption case? – sarahbloch

    Aw c’mon Sarah, you know better than that. Race has to do with the human condition, of which we have no control over. We have no control over where, or who we are born as. Party affiliation however has to do with human nature, of which we all have direct control over. We all control our thoughts and decision making.

    • neocon01 March 21, 2013 / 6:14 pm


      Please name all the politicians, their party and demographics who have been convicted or sentenced to prison THIS YEAR alone.

      is that racist?? ask them.

      • neocon01 March 21, 2013 / 6:19 pm


        The Losing Left is Beneath Contempt

        You just have to love it when the leftist fringe like MoveOn is wetting their pants because their big gun-grabbing opportunity, built on the graves of those poor child victims at Sandy Hook, has vanished into thin, Washington D.C. air, gaining them nothing. These people are beyond the point of ever being shamed by their ghoulish willingness to use the deaths of innocent children to further their left-wing causes. And of course the primary purpose of the email was to solicit donations.

        The term, “Beneath contempt,” comes to mind.

        Read more:

      • neocon01 March 21, 2013 / 6:49 pm

        speaking of criminals

        are the law licenses in the same box as the BC?

        1. President Barack Obama, former editor of the Harvard Law Review, is no longer a “lawyer”. He surrendered his license back in 2008 in order to escape charges he lied on his bar application. A “Voluntary Surrender” is not something where you decide “Gee, a license is not really something I need anymore, is it?” and forget to renew your license. No, a “Voluntary Surrender” is something you do when you’ve been accused of something, and you ‘voluntarily surrender” your license five seconds before the state suspends you.

        2 Michelle Obama “voluntarily surrendered” her law license in 1993. after a Federal Judge gave her the choice between surrendering her license or standing trial for Insurance fraud!

        3. Facts.Source:

Comments are closed.