On a recent episode of “NewsOneNow” on the TVOne network, Roland Martin and a panel of guests discussed the possibility of activists in Florida endeavoring to intimidate local businesses- including Tropicana and Disney- by threatening an economic boycott. This potential boycott is an attempt to coerce state lawmakers into repealing the so-called controversial, “stand your ground” (SYG) law.
Martin played clips of the demonstration which included Florida Congresswoman Corrine Brown- known for her big wigs and epic CNN meltdown, along with pastor Jamal Bryant, doing his best Je$$e Jack$on routine of trying to intimidate and shakedown Tropicana for not donating a portion of their profits to any “civil rights organizations.”
Martin’s panel- which included Shelby Emmett a lawyer and member of Project 21, Dru Ealons- a political commentator, and George Curry of NNPA News Service, discussed the potentiality of the economic boycotts, so-called “civil rights leaders,” and Florida’s “stand your ground” law.
Martin, Ealons and Curry defended this economic boycott because they oppose the “SYG” law. Emmett argued- in my opinion, rightly- that economic boycotts have to be thought out to their logical conclusion(s) to avoid the unintentional consequences that could negatively affect working class families as activists try to advance a political agenda. But Martin and others were undeterred in their support for this boycott because they aggressively want Florida’s law repealed.
Roland Martin is a funny guy; it’s unintentional, but still funny. In his defense of this silly boycott, Martin, like Ealons and Curry, like so-called civil rights leaders, like Barack Obama; like self-deprecating, guilty white liberals and rabid progressives, like most blacks in general who were emotionally manipulated in the Trayvon Martin case and the recent Jordan Davis case- fault the “SYG” law saying it was the reason George Zimmerman wasn’t convicted of second-degree murder for killing Trayvon Martin, and why Michael Dunn- though convicted on three counts of attempted second-degree murder, wasn’t convicted of first-degree murder in the killing of Jordan Davis.
And Martin invoked the law with a straight face.
For the thousandth time, the “SYG” law wasn’t used as a defense in either case. I repeat- the Florida statute that legalizes a “justifiable use of force” was not used in the defense of George Zimmerman or Michael Dunn.
As heartrending as these deaths may have been, both defendants- Zimmerman and Dunn- argued self-defense, not SYG. Period. The people who continue to lament the evils of SYG and who continually call for its repeal, citing the deaths of both Martin and Davis are being intentionally dishonest as they engage in racial agitation. Plainly speaking, they’re liars. Roland Martin lied; Je$$e Jack$on lied; Al $harpton lied; Barack Obama lied. Any black person- whether it’s a sorry-sack politician or the average citizen, knowingly lies when they claim that SYG is the reason why Trayvon Martin and Jordan Davis were killed.
The second segment of this show wasn’t any better. Martin rants on about SYG allowing people “to act a fool when you have that gun.” The law doesn’t do that, by the way.
Martin details what transpired the night that Michael Dunn shot Jordan Davis. If you watch and listen closely, Dunn’s actions- based on Martin’s descriptions- are in no way associated with- nor defended by- the merits of the “SYG” law. Martin goes on to conflate people (hypothetically arguing) they should be able to shoot their guns whenever and wherever because it’s a protected right.
Roland Martin is serious. Too bad he comes across as unserious.
Just like the recently vetoed, religious liberty bill in Arizona which most opponents couldn’t be bothered to read, most people who oppose the Florida SYG law haven’t read this law either. Why should these people bother with facts when they have a political agenda to advance?
If Roland Martin, two of his panelists, any self-appointed (or anointed) so-called civil rights leader or politician who are in visible positions of influence and leadership can’t take the time to read legislation they oppose, injure their moral and intellectual credibility and forfeit the privilege of being taken seriously. Liars deserve to be disregarded. What else can be said about people who intentionally lie to advance an agenda- political or otherwise?
After another clip, in the second segment, Martin references a discussion between he and Emmett in which she – again, rightly in my opinion- acknowledges the differences of priorities between younger blacks and those blacks who lived during the civil rights era.
This segment encapsulates exactly what’s wrong with the black, so-called “leadership” that self-identifies with the “civil rights generation.” Here’s a newsflash to blacks and their “leaders”- we won our civil rights- fifty years ago in fact, this July. In the past fifty years, America has done its best to offer provisions and social policies to blacks- many times at the expense of blacks, in an (never-ending) effort of absolution- atoning for the sin of racial discrimination. Any lack of progress of blacks is largely the result of self-inflicted shortcomings brought on by blacks themselves.
As a consequence, the civil rights establishment is dead. Dead. These big-mouthed black “leaders” are the result of what was birthed by the civil rights movement- the racial grievance industry (enabled by white progressives) and the the black grievance industry- those who claim to be the progeny of civil rights “leadership” who’ve personally benefitted from the civil rights era, but who’re less than truthful in acknowledging black responsibility for black problems. For both industries, black problems continue to be whitey’s fault.
More to the point, black “leadership” still thinks it’s the 1960’s, evidenced by the language they still use (mobilize, organize, etc.), the continuation of “marches” in combination with threats of boycotts, accompanied by tired and retread slogans that were characteristic of the time. All that damn energy wasted on symbolic marching (to nowhere) could be used trying to solve the crises that plague and dishonor blacks.
Emmett said, “Just because my generation doesn’t want to do things the same way that previous [civil rights] generations did does not mean we don’t care as much. It just means we look at it differently.”
And this is the hope for blacks- and the country in general. The hope is that a new quality of leadership isn’t fixated on the past, predicated on the dishonest and immoral tactics that characterizes those in the racial grievance and black grievance industries. This new leadership recognizes the new challenges that face the country and are willing and eager to confront them earnestly.