† Now Is Not The Time To Talk About Race: Compare and contrast how the MSM reports these two stories: Black flight from Washington, D.C. and white flight from the greater Boston area.

 

The Washington Post laments that “The number of African Americans residing in the District plummeted by more than 11 percent during the past decade, with blacks on the verge of losing their majority status in the city for the first time in half a century” [emphasis, The Stiletto]:

 

According to census statistics released Thursday, barely 50 percent of the District’s population was African American in 2010 - a remarkable shift in a place once nicknamed “Chocolate City.”

 

The black population dropped by more than 39,000 over the decade, down to 301,000 of the city’s 601,700 residents. At the same time, the non-Hispanic white population skyrocketed by more than 50,000 to 209,000 residents, almost a third higher than a decade earlier. …

 

The loss of blacks comes at a time when the city is experiencing a rebound, reversing a 60-year-long slide in population and adding almost 20,000 new residents between 2000 and 2010 [emphasis, The Stiletto].

 

The demographic change is the result of almost 15 years of gentrification that has transformed large swaths of Washington, especially downtown. As housing prices soared, white professionals priced out of neighborhoods such as Dupont Circle began migrating to predominantly black areas such as Petworth and Brookland [emphasis, The Stiletto]. …

 

Some say the precipitous decline in the number of African Americans is alarming.

 

“We’re going to stop this trend - gentrification,” said D.C. Council member Marion Barry (D-Ward 8). “We can’t displace old-time Washingtonians.”

 

“The key to keeping this city black is jobs, jobs, jobs for black people so they can have a better quality of life in neighborhoods in the city,” he added. “I believe in integration, but I don’t believe in the apartheid we have in Ward 8 [explanatory link added by The Stiletto]. You don’t see corner stores in Ward 3. You don’t see the liquor stores.” [Emphasis, The Stiletto].

 

Notice how “gentrification” is defined as the lack of bodegas and liquor stores – which are associated with inner city pathology – and that white professionals are characterized as a blight ruining formerly black neighborhoods. In contrast, The Washington Times offers a "just the facts" report:

 

Official 2010 Census figures released Thursday show the District's black population declining to slightly more than 50 percent of the city's total number of residents. …

 

While still a slight majority, the decline in the number of black residents is significant in a city that has long been identified with its black majority population.

 

The District's black population peaked at 71 percent in 1970 as tens of thousands of white residents left for the suburbs, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. But by 2006, the estimated percentage of black residents had fallen to 57 percent. At the same time, the population of white residents, which plunged from 65 percent in 1950 to 27 percent 30 years later, is growing again.

 

The area with the largest population growth in the last 10 years was Ward 2, a predominately white section of Northwest. The only area to decrease in population was Ward 8, a largely black area of the city.

 

According to Census figures, the population of Ward 8 is changing not because whites are moving in, but because blacks are moving out. Where are they going? Census data suggests that blacks born in the Northeast and Midwest are increasingly moving down South, reversing the Great Migration of blacks to the North.

 

Now, here’s an article from The Boston Globe about whites “abandoning Massachusetts cities at a rapid clip, continuing well-worn paths to the suburbs or out of state” [emphasis, The Stiletto]:

 

Overall, 43 of 45 large communities examined by the Globe saw declines in white population, with only suburban Peabody and Franklin countering the trend. Fourteen - including Everett, Lowell, Malden, and Watertown - dropped by double digits.

 

“It continues to be a challenge for cities to hold middle-class families,’’ said Joseph C. O’Brien, the mayor of Worcester, who said schools continue to be the “biggest driver’’ of white flight to the suburbs. In Fall River and Holyoke, for example, where the state is threatening to take over the schools if they do not improve, the white population fell off considerably. …

 

In all, the communities examined by the Globe lost 190,000 white residents, or 9 percent, even as surging numbers of minorities in many cases boosted their overall populations. For example, the state’s five largest cities - Boston, Worcester, Springfield, Lowell, and Cambridge - all grew despite losing whites, underlining the relative growth of minorities compared with whites.

 

The exodus reflects the continued move of whites to suburban and rural communities and the overall drop in the white population in Massachusetts. A Globe analysis of census data found that the number of whites statewide dropped 4 percent since 2000, the result of migration to other states and declining birth rates. …

 

The trend was strongest in lower-income communities plagued by violent crime and struggling schools. Yet wealthier communities like Beverly, Gloucester, Melrose, and Salem also saw declines, as did wealthy ones like Newton. [Emphasis, The Stiletto, who is not sure what the difference is between “wealthier communities” and “wealthy ones.”]

 

So whites are damned for moving into - and turning around - lower-income neighborhoods in Washington, D.C. and damned for moving out of violent communities with failing schools in MA.

 

† Obama Is Just About Every U.S. President All Rolled Into One!: More from Sean Hannity on the similarities between presidents Barack Hussein Obama and Chester A. Arthur (hint: the “A” stands for “Alien”), courtesy of Mediaite:

 

It’s been nearly three years since President Obama took office, and yet doubt apparently remains over his eligibility to be president. On his radio show, Sean Hannity stood up for the “crucified and beat up and smeared and besmirched” birther groups with guests Joseph Farah of WorldNetDaily and Hamas attorney Stanley Cohen suggesting that, if Chester A. Arthur had to prove he wasn’t Canadian, why shouldn’t Obama have to do the same? …

 

The original birther movement was led by the Orly Taitz of the late 19th century, attorney Arthur Hinman, against President Chester A. Arthur, who was initially rumored to have been born in Ireland before later being declared an undercover Canadian. Like the current birther movement, neither theory really panned out, but the internet is still laden with comical Arthur-birther websites declaring there is undeniable proof that Arthur was a Canadian infiltrate.

 

Editorial Note: During the 2008 campaign, a federal judge in San Francisco dismissed a lawsuit challenging John McCain's claim of U.S. citizenship (he was born in the Panama Canal Zone, where his father was stationed as a naval officer). The suit was brought against McCain – a white man – by a delegate pledged to fringe Republican candidate Alan Keyes – a black man – so Whoopi Goldberg and others who contend that Obama’s citizenship is being questioned “’cuz he’s black” (well, he’s biracial but why let the facts get in the way) are flinging a big pile of dog mess (video).

 

† Look Before You Leap: Part II (second item): Gov. Dennis Daugaard (R-SD) signed a law that makes his the first state to require women seeking abortions to attend a consultation at a “pregnancy help center” to find out what assistance is available “to help the mother keep and care for her child,” reports The New York Times:

 

Many states require counseling from doctors or other clinic staff members before an abortion to cover topics like health risks. What makes the new South Dakota law different is that the mandated counseling will come from people whose central qualification is that they are opposed to abortion.

 

“I think everyone agrees with the goal of reducing abortion by encouraging consideration of other alternatives,” Mr. Daugaard, a Republican, said in a statement Tuesday.

 

The law has provoked vehement opposition from supporters of abortion rights, both locally and nationally, who describe the requirements as unconstitutional obstacles for women seeking to have an abortion. Planned Parenthood said it would challenge the law in court; it is scheduled to take effect July 1. …

 

The law appears likely to escalate the tensions between abortion providers and the pregnancy help centers, which often operate in close proximity and are listed alongside each other in the phone book under abortion (the Alpha Center even used to be in a space that was once a Planned Parenthood clinic). Each side regularly accuses the other of manipulating and coercing women.

 

SD is not the only Repub-dominated state in the process of passing legislation to make abortion safer and rarer – a goal that pro-abortionists claim to support.  To this end, “tactics vary,” reports The Associated Press, and include “mandatory sonograms and anti-abortion counseling, sweeping limits on insurance coverage, bans on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy.”

 

† Pundits To The Left! Pundits To The Right!: Left-wing organization Media Matters for America runs media training “boot camps” where “rebel forces” are “trained for combat” on Fox News and mold “softie policy wonks” from “observers to shock troops,” reports The Washington Post:

 

Since its inception in August 2009, the Progressive Talent Initiative, or PTI, has trained nearly 100 pundits who have appeared 800 times on television and radio. Media Matters uses that metric to pitch donors for more contributions, but its leadership believes that the surge of camera-ready liberals has recaptured lost ground in the media wars against conservatives. …

 

The problem for the soldiers of the left, according to Media Matters instructors, is that they are just too smart for their own good. The traditional dependence on facts and figures, on being right, is no longer germane. Too often these wonks disappear into the policy weeds or fall through the cracks of nuance.

 

Eager to offer a conversion parable, the instructors showed a Fox News appearance by PTI graduate Taylor West, now a communications director for National Journal, in which her good-natured teasing bested a conservative expert on Web security. She knew virtually nothing about the issue and crammed for the interview in the makeup chair [emphasis, The Stiletto].

 

The key, they explained, was to ooze likability and reasonableness, and make their opponents seem otherwise. A talk-show host acts as a proxy for the viewer, they counseled, so it was critical to maintain a good rapport. …

 

The participants became adept in the craft of the pivot and setting up far-left straw men to make their own left-leaning positions seem more moderate. …

 

The participants studied “strength and warmth inventory” handouts (“furrowed brow” for strength, “brow up” for warmth). They learned to avoid licking lips, tilting heads and rubbing one hand against the other. Even a benign tic can read sinister on-screen. “Paper covers rock” is the safest hands-at-rest position.

 

Red Eye’s Greg Gutfeld and Andy Levy had a field day with the goings on at this boot camp for “anti-Fox freaks,” Mediaite reports:

 

Levy wonders why Media Matters needed a separate training session, saying “I thought MSNBC was Media Matters boot camp?” And to top it all off, Gutfeld asked why even bother training these people, since Media Matters should have learned from singer George Michael’s storied past: “you can’t train somebody to unsuck.”  

† All The News That’s Fart To Print: According to the 'Generation i' survey, conducted on behalf of digital customer engagement agency Seven (formerly Seven Squared), 21 percent of male iPad owners, and 12 percent of women owners have used their iPad in the bathroom. The poll of 1,007 iPad users also reveals that 87 percent used their tablet every day of the week – which means they took into the bathroom with them every day of the week. Think about all the germs on the touch screens. Ewwww.

 

† Updates To Previous Posts (last item, Obama Administration Christmas Bomber Missteps Worse Than You Think): In a reversal of previous policy a three-page F.B.I. memorandum, dated Oct. 21, 2010 instructs agents to interrogate suspected “operational terrorists” about immediate threats to public safety without advising them of their Miranda rights to remain silent and to have an attorney present, reports The New York Times:

 

It said that the “magnitude and complexity” of the terrorist threat justified “a significantly more extensive public safety interrogation without Miranda warnings than would be permissible in an ordinary criminal case.”

 

“Depending on the facts, such interrogation might include, for example, questions about possible impending or coordinated terrorist attacks; the location, nature and threat posed by weapons that might post an imminent danger to the public; and the identities, locations, and activities or intentions of accomplices who may be plotting additional imminent attacks,” the memo said. …

 

The practice of reading Miranda warnings to terrorism suspects arrested in the United States has led to political disputes. In particular, Republicans, seeking to portray the Obama administration as soft on terrorism, criticized the reading of a Miranda warning to the main suspect in the failed bombing of a Detroit-bound airliner on Dec. 25, 2009.

 

Obama administration officials said the warnings had not prevented interrogators from gaining intelligence from such suspects, and the F.B.I. director, Robert S. Mueller III, testified in July 2010 that agents were already using a broad interpretation of the public safety exception to the Miranda rule in terrorism cases.

 

Still, in May 2010 Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. floated the idea of seeking legislation that would ask courts to interpret the public safety exception to allow lengthier questioning of terrorism suspects before the warning. The administration never produced such a proposal. But the October memorandum shows that the Justice Department decided on its own to encourage agents to take a broad interpretation.

 

† Updates To Previous Posts (second item, A To Z Approach On Illegal Immigration In AZ): Landscaper Leonel Ruiz, an illegal alien living on Long Island who speaks little English, had sent his American-born 4-year-old daughter, Emily, back to Guatemala for the winter so the cold weather would not aggravate her asthma. Her flight back to NYC was diverted to Dulles International Airport near Washington because of bad weather – and her grandfather, who was accompanying her was deported by immigration officials because even though he held a valid work visa he had committed an immigration infraction two decades before. Emily was sent back with him because “as a citizen, she has the right to re-enter her country, [b]ut her parents are illegal immigrants, which has complicated the prospect of a reunion, reports The New York Times:

 

Today, Emily is in Guatemala, her parents are struggling to bring her home [emphasis, The Stiletto], and lawyers and federal officials are arguing over parental responsibility and citizenship rights. The Ruizes find themselves on the front lines of a heated immigration debate: how to treat families in which the parents are here illegally, while their children, born in the United States, are citizens.

 

The case comes as elected officials across the country have pushed for bills to end automatic citizenship for children, born here, who are sometimes referred to pejoratively as anchor babies. Immigrant advocates say the proposals are antithetical to American ideals.

 

There are two conflicting versions of the Ruiz story. Officials at Customs and Border Protection say they offered Mr. Ruiz the chance to pick up Emily at the airport, but he “elected to have her return to Guatemala with her grandfather.” …

 

But such a meeting could have put Mr. Ruiz at risk of detention, and he said he was never offered that option. In an interview conducted in Spanish, Mr. Ruiz, who speaks little English, said that an agent spoke to him over the telephone in English and laid out two choices: Emily could enter the custody of the State of Virginia, or she could return to Guatemala with her grandfather.

 

Terrified that she would be given up for adoption if she entered state custody, Mr. Ruiz said, he agreed to put her on a plane back to Guatemala. …

 

Immigrant advocates have seized on the Ruiz case as a sign of what may come if new legislation curtails the citizenship rights of illegal immigrants’ children.

 

Note that Emily’s parents voluntarily send her back home to Guatemala any time they wish but consider their family “separated” when the U.S. government flew her there. There is a simple, common-sense solution to this problem: Reunite the family in Guatemala and allow the couple’s U.S.-born children to return at the age of 18 and apply for their parents to join them.  

 

† Updates To Previous Posts (fourth item, What It's Like To Be Sheriff Joe): As a member of Sheriff Joe Arpaio's celebrity "Immigration Posse," tough-guy thespian Steven Seagal “manned a tank during a ridealong with Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio, his deputies, and a SWAT team” to capture “unarmed suspected cockfighter Jesus Llovera” in what some regard as “a publicity stunt for A&E’s reality series Lawman,” Mediaite reports. Going after a cockfighter with a tank is like using a Howitzer to swat a fly. But then, Segal explained that "Animal cruelty is one of my pet peeves."  For her part, The Stiletto wishes she could deal with her pet peeves with the aid of a tank.

 

† Updates To Previous Posts (second item, Katie Couric Kills): Katie Couric was an anchor in the old-fashioned sense of the word - she dragged down the ratings of the "CBS Evening News." And now, CBS is reportedly planning to drop said anchor by June and replace her with “60 Minutes” correspondent Scott Pelley, who has the requisite gravitas, having won 15 Emmys.

 

† Updates To Previous Posts (sixth item, The Stiletto Scoops Rush Limbaugh): First Lady Michelle Obama has decided that her fight against obesity must begin at home. But it’s not her own body mass index she’s concerned about, but that of her daughters Malia, 12, and Sasha, 9, reports Agence France-Presse:

 

Obama said she was surprised to learn that her daughters' body mass index, or BMI, numbers were "creeping upwards," she wrote on yahoo.com's website.

 

Editorial Note: The Stiletto takes MO at her word when she claims, “I didn't really know what BMI was," even though she worked as vice president for community and external affairs For University of Chicago Medical Center for four years, because if she did she’d lay off the ribs.