Al Sharpton. Courtesy New York Post

by James C. Sherlock

“Progressive for who?”

That question was asked by Al Sharpton directly to a gathering of his supporters at a conference hosted by his National Action Network while flanked by Lori Lightfoot, Eric Adams and two other big city Democratic mayors.

“Anybody that tells you they’re progressive but don’t care about dealing with violent crimes are not.”

“Progressive for who?”

“We gotta stop using progressive as a noun and use it as an adjective.”

“You’re labeled progressive but your action is regressive. I’m woke? You must think I’m asleep.”

He demanded “a national agenda around urban violence, urban crime and accountability.”

“Accountability.” There is no word more anathema to progressives. He could not have hurt them worse.

Watch the video.

That was not the first shot, but one of heavy caliber, in the revolution against progressive destructiveness by the Black people who are among its primary victims.

The Democratic Party of Virginia, tethered to Northern Virginia progressives, left its base, not the other way around.

It is now the “progressives with college credentials” party that tolerates other voters at election time.

It deals blows to Black communities starting before birth. In the name of “helping” them.

  • Democrats demand limitless abortion to the moment of birth. To preserve … what, let’s say it … the vastly disproportionate share of Virginia abortions that destroy minority children.
  • It is the party with such utter disdain, against all evidence, for the talents of minorities that it ignores their plight in utterly dreadful public schools like those of Richmond and Portsmouth. Figuring, one supposes, that if they just keep their eyes closed long enough something will change.
  •  It has declared public schools “systemically” racist and thus irredeemably bad educators of minorities.
  • But it is at the same time terrified that Virginia’s minority citizens will find out about the extraordinary achievements of poor minority kids in New York City. Find out that there are tens of thousands of kids on the waiting lists for those schools, blocked from expansion by Democrats in Albany. Charters are blocked effectively from existing at all in urban districts by Virginia law that requires school divisions to approve their own competition.
  • Democrats decided against the evidence from New York City that minorities are uneducable to common college standards, and rail against both those standards and the tests that reveal the damage done by progressive dogma in schools.
  • Democrats in colleges and universities, which is a redundancy, have implemented lower college admission standards and created tailored degree programs for poorly educated minorities to attain credentials.
  • Seeing the unemployability of graduates with such degrees, progressives implemented reserved categories of post-degree jobs in a new division, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI), to employ them to police the ideological purity of the progressive institutions themselves. Those jobs require nothing but those tailored credentials and the appropriate levels of social justice warrior zeal.
  • Democrats have physically threatened one of their own major constituencies, teachers, by in 2020 making schools more dangerous with changes to Virginia law that used to require reporting to police of assault and battery in schools.
  • That law change was made to allow for what Democrats in the General Assembly deemed the culturally irredeemable violence of minorities bound for its self-defined “school-to-prison” pipelines. The progressive fix to their self-defined problem? Don’t report it.
  • Anti-cop city councils cut back on police budgets and drove cops to leave with relentless attacks on their honor and fitness to risk their lives to serve the people of their cities. Leaving too few cops to maintain public safety in minority neighborhoods. See Sharpton, Al.
  • Anti-prosecution Democrats ran in Virginia in 2019 and after to be Commonwealth’s Attorney in progressive districts. Many won. They have since as policy released career criminals back into un-policed minority neighborhoods to terrorize them. Again, I defer to Mr. Sharpton.

Bottom line.

Virginia Democrats call opponents of those policies racist.

Seriously.

Their quasi-religious dogma and zeal, fed by self-referential academic “studies,” are intact.

But even Al Sharpton, who still claims credit for criminal justice “reform” and police “accountability,” thinks they went too far.

He is not standing for the results any more.

“Progressive for who?”

 


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

46 responses to “Virginia Democrats – “Progressive for Who?””

  1. Virginia Gentleman Avatar
    Virginia Gentleman

    This is such a shocking post of nonsense. Just because someone keeps saying things over and over doesn’t make it true. The viewpoints expressed demonstrates disdain for any belief other than their own and is blind from reality. I really can’t understand how anyone could be so wrong. I know my viewpoints differ from Va Republicans – but I don’t hold such contempt against the whole group as this post does. This type of narrative is 100% what needs to change in America.

    1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
      James C. Sherlock

      You, McCarthy and Nancy are thermometers. The more the truth hurts, the hotter you get.

      You have not refuted any point made, rather just disparaged the author.

      When Al Sharpton is abandoning ship, it is worth checking for leaks.

    2. James C. Sherlock Avatar
      James C. Sherlock

      You, McCarthy and Nancy are thermometers. The more the truth hurts, the hotter you get.

      You have not refuted any point made, rather just disparaged the author.

      When Al Sharpton is abandoning ship, it is worth checking for leaks.

      1. Virginia Gentleman Avatar
        Virginia Gentleman

        Ok … I will bite. Please provide your source to these three points.

        1. “Democrats demand limitless abortion to the moment of birth.” I argue that this not true.

        2. “It is the party with such utter disdain, against all evidence, for the talents of minorities that it ignores their plight in utterly dreadful public schools like those of Richmond and Portsmouth.” I argue that this is not true.

        3. “It has declared public schools “systemically” racist and thus irredeemably bad educators of minorities.” I argue that this is not true.

        1. DJRippert Avatar
          DJRippert

          #1. Democrat Kathy Tran’s cleverly worded bill to allow abortions up to the time of birth. While Tran’s bill would have required one doctor to certify that the abortion was necessary in cases of the mother’s mental health being compromised, her bill’s proposed wording replaced ” … substantially and irremediably impair the mental or physical health of the woman.” Tran’s bill would have deleted ” …. substantially and irredeemably …”. So, an abortion up to the time of birth would be OK if that birth would impair the mental health of the birthing person.

          https://www.virginiamercury.com/2019/01/30/failed-legislation-loosening-restrictions-on-late-term-abortions-which-are-already-legal-in-some-cases-in-virginia-ignites-furor/

          #2. Support for charter schools has “collapsed” in the Democratic Party.

          https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/01/unlearning-democrats-answer-on-charter-schools.html

          #3. “Racial inequity is baked into the nation’s education system in ways big and small.”

          https://www.seattletimes.com/education-lab/to-understand-structural-racism-look-to-our-schools/

          1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            “So, an abortion up to the time of birth would be OK if that birth would impair the mental health of the birthing person.”

            Why do you question the motivation of a woman who needs to terminate her pregnancy – especially late in its term? Do you think she is not going through enough and that she also deserves the likes of you looking over her shoulder to ask… “but will your impairment really be “substantial”…?

          2. DJRippert Avatar
            DJRippert

            I believe that society has the right to both define murder and enforce laws that penalize those who commit murder.

            I believe that one justification for what would other wise be murder is self-defense. However, I believe that the self-defense justification needs to be allowed only in cases where a person’s life is clearly in jeopardy.

            Do you believe that a woman who kills her one month old baby should be excused if she is “going through enough” with the child rearing process?

            Since I believe that life begins well before the third trimester, I think that aborting a baby in the third trimester should be justified only if the mother’s life is in peril.

            When do you believe life begins?

            That is the key question in all these debates.

          3. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            You realize that the reason that babies are aborted in the 3rd trimester is because they are not viable in any way outside the womb, don’t you… This is not murder any more than turning off life support for a brain dead ICU patient is murder.

          4. Virginia Gentleman Avatar
            Virginia Gentleman

            My response to this was deleted and I don’t know why. I suggested that Kathy Tran does not speak for the entire Democratic Party any more than the a bill to require a vaginal ultasound is not the position of the entire Republican party. Support for charter schools collapsing does not mean that Dems have disdain for the talents of minorities. And finally, the source article doesn’t in any way prove that all Dems believe public schools can’t educate minorities. I have no idea why this response would be deleted.

          5. CJBova Avatar

            The addition of calling others’ comments ridiculous and ignorant crosses the line.

          6. Virginia Gentleman Avatar
            Virginia Gentleman

            Totally understand now and it makes sense. I will refrain from that type of language in the future. Thanks for the explanation.

  2. Each of Sherlock’s dozen bullet points is entirely defensible. If the list is deficient in any way, it’s because it is not comprehensive enough.

    Sherlock doesn’t mention welfare dependency, the validation of single-parent households, home ownership among people who can’t afford it, sending academically ill-prepared people to college only to have them drop out saddled with debt, propagating an ideology that says Blacks live in a racist system that is stacked against them, or asserting that certain traits critical for success in life and careers are tainted by “whiteness.”

    Progressive wokeness is not about helping Black people. It’s about making cultural elites feel superior to the deplorables. Progressive policies are a universal failure. Black people, especially poor Black people, are collateral damage.

    But I expect that Sherlock stuck to the short list in the cause of brevity.

    1. James McCarthy Avatar
      James McCarthy

      Channeling Sherlock requires that all of his articles and ugly comments are read. Sad that, given his unfettered access to posting on BR, you are obliged to defend him. Time to reconsider that perqusite.

      1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
        James C. Sherlock

        So you wish me to be cancelled?

        Thank you for playing directly to type and reminding everyone of progressive dedication to suppression of speech.

      2. Lefty665 Avatar
        Lefty665

        It’s another Jim McCarthy silly walk. Congrats, you’ve outdone yourself.

    2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      “…the validation of single-parent households…”

      So in the Conservative world single-parent households are now “invalid”…? Go with that, please…

  3. DJRippert Avatar
    DJRippert

    What Al Sharpton seems to be saying is that many of the progressive policies espoused by those leftists claiming to help minorities are failing. Who are the victims of “soft on crime” policies? Poor minority people. Who are the victims of monopoly government schools where there is no school choice? Poor minority people.

    Lori Lightfoot just became the first sitting mayor in decades to lose the Democratic nomination in Chicago for a second term. She couldn’t have been more progressive. Who voted her out? Whites are a minority in Chicago ( 31.4%). It wasn’t those supposedly racist White people who showed Lori the door.

    Meanwhile, Biden’s approval rating has reached an all time low.

    Sharpton is saying something pretty profound. In my opinion, he is questioning whether the upper middle class suburbanites who dictate the progressive agenda are in tune with the real concerns of poor minority citizens.

    You could translate Sharpton’s message into: “You rich White liberals just aren’t listening.”

  4. Lefty665 Avatar
    Lefty665

    My wife and I were active in DPVA a dozen or so years ago when the “Progressives” started showing up at Party functions. It was hard to tell who they were and what they stood for. They did not have much in common with the progressives of the ’30s and ’40s. After poking around some it looked like they were really just liberals who lacked the fortitude to stand up for their brand. They made up a new label for themselves with vague historical echos and without the liberal baggage.

    The Party steadily became more rigid and demanding of acquiescence, defending the indefensible, that was part of why we quit. The subsequent descent into identity politics that has devolved into racist CRT/DIE, neo con war mongering and embrace of senility makes us glad we got out, and not a moment too soon.

    “Progressive for who?” is indeed the question. Sharpton ran an interesting campaign for the Dem nomination in ’08. Rhetorically Obama was a big letdown after Sharpton spoke.

    While I don’t doubt Sharpton’s rep for self promotion, he has worthwhile things to say.

    “Progressive for who?” is one of them.

  5. Jonathan DeWilicker Avatar
    Jonathan DeWilicker

    Like a broken clock. Too little, too late, people like Sharpton are the ones who have enabled the violence and lack of accountability for decades. We have 60+ years of national black riots, and people still think they’re the victim.

  6. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    “Democrats have physically threatened one of their own major constituencies, teachers, by in 2020 making schools more dangerous with changes to Virginia law that used to require reporting to police of assault and battery in schools.”

    This has been shown to be wrong multiple times on this blog yet here we see it repeated. In fact, it was Republicans (led by Dick Black) who removed the requirement to report all assault and batteries in schools to local law enforcement.

  7. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    “Democrats have physically threatened one of their own major constituencies, teachers, by in 2020 making schools more dangerous with changes to Virginia law that used to require reporting to police of assault and battery in schools.”

    This has been shown to be wrong multiple times on this blog yet here we see it repeated. In fact, it was Republicans (led by Dick Black) who removed the requirement to report all assault and batteries in schools to local law enforcement.

  8. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    Aka, Republicans grasping for wedge issues…

  9. Nathan Avatar

    Al Sharpton has a long history, with only one common thread running through it. Al Sharpton is for Al Sharpton. Any alignment with a worthy cause is purely coincidental.

    My guess, he must be getting heat from black supporters. Without them, he loses all relevance, and along with it, what he cares about most – power and money.

    1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
      James C. Sherlock

      You are correct. Mr. Sharpton is clearly getting heat from Black supporters.

      But I think he sees it as well.

      When Sharpton used the word “accountable”, it terrified Democrats.

      Listen to them squeal in this comment section.

      1. Nathan Avatar

        Have you seen this? About 3 minutes in, Al Sharpton sure doesn’t hold Lightfood accountable as she blames everyone but herself.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tzIaWIfBys

    2. WayneS Avatar

      True enough, but it’s also true that if “progressives” have lost Al Sharpton they’ve gone beyond the boundaries of “progressiveness” and strayed deep into the realm of “so open-minded their brains fell out”.

    3. James McCarthy Avatar
      James McCarthy

      Progressives answer to DJT?

      1. Nathan Avatar

        “Progressives answer to DJT?”

        Where did that come from?

  10. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    “Democrats demand limitless abortion to the moment of birth.”

    Hmmm…. “limitless” seems somewhat extreme and easily disproved. Nonetheless, Sherlock is correct that Democrats support access to legal abortion services for women who wish or need (as is frequently the case) to terminate their pregnancies up to the point of birth. There are good reasons for that and to vilify such a stance is really absurd.

    “To preserve … what, let’s say it … the vastly disproportionate share of Virginia abortions that destroy minority children.”

    And here the author assigns motive to the above stated position based in zero evidence. A typical ploy used by those attempting to drive wedge issues preceding an election. It is also where what little credibility that the author could perhaps claim was lost.

  11. Lefty665 Avatar
    Lefty665

    My wife and I were active in DPVA a dozen or so years ago when the “Progressives” started showing up at Party functions. It was hard to tell who they were and what they stood for. They did not have much in common with the progressives of the ’40s. After poking around some it looked like they were really just liberals who lacked the fortitude to stand up for their brand. They made up a new label for themselves with vague historical echos and without the liberal baggage.

    The Party steadily became more rigid and demanding of acquiescence, defending the indefensible, that was part of why we quit. The subsequent “progressive” descent into identity politics that has devolved into racist CRT/DIE, neo con war mongering and embrace of senility makes us glad we got out, and not a moment too soon.

    “Progressive for who?” is indeed the question. Sharpton ran an interesting campaign for the Dem nomination in ’08. Rhetorically Obama was a big letdown after Sharpton spoke. That foreshadowed Obama’s disappointing administration of SAME.

    While I don’t doubt Sharpton’s rep for self promotion, he has some worthwhile things to say.

    “Progressive for who?” is one of them.

    1. Nathan Avatar

      Al Sharpton is primarily a race bating money hustler.

      Sharpton also claims he’s “outraged at the removal of John Rogers, a well-respected business leader for the Black community,” from McDonald’s corporate board.

      Truth is, Rogers served 20 years, the maximum according to corporate policy. He left at the same time as a white director who’d also maxed out.

      https://nypost.com/2023/05/03/dont-buy-al-sharptons-race-hustling-shakedown-of-mcdonalds/

      1. Lefty665 Avatar
        Lefty665

        He may be all you say and nothing more, or not.

        He is asking a good question of the white twits, aka neo-liberal elites, aka “progressives” who are running things.

        “Progressive for who?”

        So go ahead with the ad hominem attacks on him and don’t deal with the substance of what he is saying if that makes you happy.

  12. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    “Democrats demand limitless abortion to the moment of birth.”

    Hmmm…. “limitless” seems somewhat extreme and easily disproved. Nonetheless, Sherlock is correct that Democrats support access to legal abortion services for women who wish or need (as is frequently the case) to terminate their pregnancies up to the point of birth. There are good reasons for that and to vilify such a stance is really absurd.

    “To preserve … what, let’s say it … the vastly disproportionate share of Virginia abortions that destroy minority children.”

    And here the author assigns motive to the above stated position based on zero evidence. A typical ploy used by those attempting to drive wedge issues preceding an election. It is also where what little credibility the author could have perhaps claimed was lost.

    1. Paul Sweet Avatar
      Paul Sweet

      So it’s racist for the percentage of inmates who are black to exceed their percentage of Virginia’s population, but it’s not racist for the percentage of abortions for blacks to be more than double their percentage of Virginia’s population?

      ( I tried to paste the graphic in James Sherlock’s post “Conservatives Actively Promoting Better Economic Future for Petersburg” but it wouldn’t paste)

      1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        What did I say about racism? Sherlock assigned a motivation for Dem’s support of legal abortions for all women as being to keep black abortions disproportionately high with no evidence provided whatsoever. It is an unsupported claim being used to drive a wedge during an election season. That is my critique, plain and simple.

        There may very well be systemic reasons why black women are disproportionately seeking out legal abortion services. Maybe a discussion on what they might be would be beneficial… alas, not useful to the author apparently.

    2. DJRippert Avatar
      DJRippert

      “Nonetheless, Sherlock is correct that Democrats support access to legal abortion services for women who wish or need (as is frequently the case) to terminate their pregnancies up to the point of birth.”

      Why stop at the point of birth?

      A two week old baby is hardly any different than a fetus two week before birth.

      Apparently, Democrats believe that life begins at birth.

      Ok, fine. Let’s debate the question of when life begins rather than getting all emotional.

      1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        Once again, no one is suggesting aborting viable children at the point of birth. Why are you so set on forcing mothers to carry such a non-viable fetus to full term and deliver it only to see it die moments later – if it even survives through delivery? Are you really so heartless?

Leave a Reply