The Outrage Over Oakland Cop Killer In Larger Context

Start Thinking Right ^ | March 28, 2009 | Michael Eden

[Michael Eden]

One video is worth a thousand words:

I mean, if you're not going to celebrate a man who murdered four police officers after hauling a 12 year old girl off the street at gunpoint and raping her (reportedly along with several other girls according to law enforcement), who are you going to celebrate?

The San Francisco Chronicle had part of the story:

Dozens march for Mixon, against police Charles Burress, Chronicle Staff Writer

"OPD you can't hide - we charge you with genocide," chanted the demonstrators as they marched along MacArthur Boulevard, near the intersection with 74th Avenue where Mixon, 26, a fugitive parolee, gunned down two motorcycle officers who had pulled him over in a traffic stop. He killed two more officers who tried to capture him where he was hiding in his sister's apartment nearby.

The protest was organized by the Oakland branch of the Uhuru Movement, whose flyers for the march declared, "Stop Police Terror." Many marchers wore T-shirts featuring Mixon's photo, including a woman identified by march organizers as Mixon's mother. The woman declined to comment and gave her name only as Athena.

Lolo Darnell, one of Mixon's cousins at the demonstration, said, "He needs sympathy too. If he's a criminal, everybody's a criminal."

Asked about police allegations that Mixon was suspected in several rapes, including that of a 12-year-old girl, marcher Mandingo Hayes said, "He wasn't a rapist. I don't believe that."

Bystanders had mixed reactions. Nicole Brown said that she can't condone murder but that police don't respect residents of the area. Daria Belt said she had no sympathy for the protesters but sympathized for Mixon's family.

Of course, the Chronicle and most of the rest of the media most definitely don't want to tell you the full story: for example, it's NOT the "Uhuru Movement" who marched in the street praising a cop murdering rapist career dirtbag; it's the International People's Democratic Uhuru Movement. Wouldn't want anyone to in any way be able to connect this "movement" (as in 'bowel movement') to Democrats, would we?

We also learn that Mixon's cousin, Dolores Darnell, 26, called Mixon "a true hero, a soldier." And DEMOCRATIC Uhuru Movement member Kihad Deen argued, "I don't condone what he did, but it's bringing to light the frustrations between the community and the police. This gives people a chance to speak their minds."

If one person - just one - in that march voted for or in any way supported John McCain, I will eat my underwear. This is a hard-core liberal movement supporting hard-core leftist causes - and the left deserves full "credit" for the DEMOCRATIC Uhuru Movement's "contributions."

The Associated Press ran a story that had the following to say:

OAKLAND, Calif.—Relatives of the man suspected of fatally shooting three Oakland police officers said Sunday the 26-year-old parolee was frustrated about not finding work and feared returning to jail...

Mixon's uncle, 38-year-old Curtis Mixon of Fremont, said his nephew had become depressed because he could not find work as a convicted felon. His nephew expected authorities to issue an arrest warrant for missing parole meetings, even though the he felt he was not to blame, he said.

"I think his frustration was building up, but he was trying to better himself," Curtis Mixon said.

Mixon was a hero of the common man, a regular Willy Loman character come to life from the pages of Death of a Salesman. Of that story we read:

It is said that [Arthur] Miller is criticizing America and capitalism as a promoter of socialism. It is demonstrated through Willy, the protagonist during the story, who struggles to support his family and even himself. It is the story of a man at the end of his life, who realizes he has wasted his years in pursuit of a goal that is not only unattainable, but was never real to begin with.

And of course, to top Willy Loman, Mixon never had a chance - claim liberals - because he was black.

The fact that he was a 26-year old career criminal who spent six years in prison for armed robbery before spending another 9 months for parole violations before being a serial rapist and then four-time cop killer amount to insignificant details - and I of course must be a hardened racist for even bringing them up to begin with.

We find the classic liberal story line: Lovelle Mixon as victim of racist white societal oppression, finally lashing out as a hero and dying in a blaze of glory in a statement against that oppression.

This is nothing new - which is why I tie this right to the Obama camp which buys this brand of bullshit hook, line, and sinker.

Here's another murderous rat bastard openly cherished by the left - and specifically by Obama supporters:

["KRIV-TV image of Texas Obama volunteers with Che Guevara flag. (KRIV-TV Photo) "]

Che Guevera was a hard-core communist murderer of anyone with whom he disagreed - which is apparently all one needs to be iconicized as a hero by the political left these days.

Why would anyone NOT want as President of the United States of America a candidate whose campaign offices honor a man who said:

"The U.S. is the great enemy of mankind!" raved Ernesto "Che" Guevara in 1961. "Against those hyenas there is no option but extermination. We will bring the war to the imperialist enemies' very home, to his places of work and recreation. The imperialist enemy must feel like a hunted animal wherever he moves. Thus we'll destroy him! We must keep our hatred against them (the U.S.) alive and fan it to paroxysms!"

Why not eulogize with a flag the man who wrote to his father:

I'd like to confess, papa, at that moment I discovered that I really like killing.

Why not celebrate the leftist ideologue who proclaimed:

"The solutions to the world's problems lie behind the Iron Curtain," stressed Ernesto “Che" Guevara who often signed his correspondence with the moniker "Stalin II." "If the nuclear missiles had remained we would have fired them against the heart of the U.S. including New York City," he boasted. "The victory of socialism is well worth millions of atomic victims."

Why honor Guevara? Because of course "the victory of socialism" IS well worth millions of victims - atomic or otherwise - to the left. Always has been. And it most certainly still is today, even as it is imposed upon America with a swiftness that even the most ardent critics of Obama are finding stunning.

If a John McCain office had been discovered to have a Yugoslavian flag emblazoned with the image of Slobodan Milošević, I have a feeling the media would have interpreted the implications of such a thing far differently than the nonchalant "ho-hum" response accorded to Obama. And of course the same "ho-hum" response was accorded to him as radical after radical was discovered in his intimate circle of support.

The honoring of figures like Lovelle Mixon by the Democratic Uhuru Movement is part of a time-honored tradition of the American left. Many of the same liberal politicians and bureaucrats in office today once publicly celebrated Che Guevara, the Black Panthers, and/or other violent leftist extremist people and groups in their own "day." By way of contrast let me assure you; Timothy McVeigh isn't getting a lot of play in Republican circles. The right doesn't play this incredibly ugly game; the left does.

We don't do this crap. Nor do we provide "useful idiot" support for movements such as communism which is responsible for more than 100 million murders in the 20th century. Instead, the very people who supported murderous people and movements decry George Bush as a war criminal for taking out an Iraqi tyrant who was responsible for more than one million lives in murderous wars that he started, and who filled mass graves with the bodies of more than 400,000 of his own people.

The American people have never faced up to the idols of the left or the implications of what it means when people with such idols assume power.

[Jvette]

ladyjane, you are right, of course.

The sad thing is that the black family was a strong community before the advent of the 60’s and the liberals desire to “help”.

Blacks are victims, but not of white society, but of liberal policies. They can recover, but not until they take back control of their families and communities by throwing off the yoke of government intervention.

[ladyjane]

At this point I’m not ready to agree that liberals are to blame. Blacks themselves have a responsibility to behave lawfully and responsibly.

You yourself said your kids had some really decent black friends. How did they escape the liberal manipulation? Perhaps because of personal responsibility?

Years ago, someone here on FR asked: How is it that boat people can come to this country not speaking English and with no money and within two years own a couple of nail salons and drive BMWs?

We live in the land of opportunity. If you can’t make it here, you can’t make it anywhere. Blaming the liberals for massive failure is a dead end.

[ladyjane]

p.s. I’m reminded of a kid in the first grade who is uncontrollable. The parents want to blame everybody - the school, the teachers, the policies. In fact, it’s the kid who needs to shape up.

[Jvette]

In regards to both your responses. My point is exactly that the liberal policies of the 60’s worked to displace fathers and therefore fractured the family. The family is the bulwark of a stable society.

At this point with what we know, blacks have to take back their own dignity and realize that they have not been helped by government entitlement policies. Bill Cosby had it right and it’s funny how now that Obama has been elected, Bill has been silent.

These boys and others that my children know and have been friends with come from intact families with strong fathers and mothers who reject the BS victimology of the liberals and encourage and support their children’s education and work ethic. This is true for the successful white kids they know as well.

The first grader is not served when excuses are made, it will only allow further bad behavior. It is the parents though that must reject victimhood, otherwise, they are setting him up for failure.