Confronting Al Sharpton
Of Al Sharpton, Peter Flaherty, president of the'National Legal and Policy Center said: "He's good at harassing people and making noise. CEOs give him his way because it is a lot easier than confronting him."
Sharpton declares an emergency every time he sees a shakedown opportunity, every time he thinks "injustice" is being done. His latest emergency concerns the Motion Picture Academy.
Sharpton will stage an emergency meeting to pout because the only black-oriented Academy Award nomination this year is the Best Picture bid for Selma.
The lack of diversity in today's Oscar nominations is appalling and while it is good that Selma was nominated for 'Best Picture,' it's ironic that they nominated a story about the racial shutout around voting while there is a racial shutout around the Oscar nominations. With all of the talent in Selma and other Black movies this year, it is hard to believe that we have less diversity in the nominations today than in recent history
As Deroy Murdock says, "Evidently, there are emergencies, and then there are EMERGENCIES!"
(Strangely, we’ve never heard from Sharpton when Blues Brothers, which had lots of blacks in it, got passed over. Why does he protest now, but did not then? Hypocrisy from Sharpton?)
Sharpton is proving to be his own worst enemy by providing ammunition with which to fight him, if only CEOs would use it. How so? Well, you never hear Sharpton complain about the National Basketball Association (NBA). As of the 2012-2013 season, the NBA was 76.3 percent African-American, while, in 2010, African-Americans comprised 13.2 percent of the U.S. population. NBA - 2012; U.S. population - 2010. No, the years aren't the same. But I don't remember an African-American population explosion either.
Nor has Sharpton gone after the National Football League (NFL), with African-Americans comprising 67.2 percent of its players in 2013.
Hypocrisy? He never declares an emergency when blacks are in the majority or favored.
I don't remember Sharpton declaring an emergency when Detroit went bankrupt in 2013. According to several sources, Detroit going bankrupt had nothing to do with race. It had everything to do with a shrinking tax base and mismanagement. Seven of eight member of the current city council are black (one member is Latino), so Sharpton said nothing because it appeared that race was a factor. Detroit was (and is) broke, there was no money to be had, so Sharpton declared no emergency. Plus appearances weren't to his liking.
- Of the violent interracial crimes committed involving blacks and whites, blacks commit 85% and whites commit 15%.
- Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks -- 45% versus 43%.When whites commit violent crime, only 3% 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 hate crimes against whites than vice versa.
Detroit crime: again appearances.
These are the perfect illustrations that, for Sharpton, appearance and hypocrisy, rather than facts, are the determining factors for declaring an emergency. And money.
My question is this: If all of this ammunition, this information and data about Sharpton are easily found, why would any corporate CEO pay him off? They can prove Sharpton to be a hypocrite, to be focused exclusively on appearance and just wanting to extort money from them. Why not use the money Sharpton tried to extort to mount their own PR campaigns to tell the world what Sharpton has tried to do, as well as explaining what a hypocrite he is? That's what the PR department is for. I have already done most of the research for y'all.
And if all of this ain't enough, Tawana Brawley can always be brought up. Yeah, play the credibility card, and play dirty -- Sharpton does. Plus a blackmailer (is that racist?) is never satisfied with one payoff. Corporate CEOs, he will be back -- count on it: "Once Sharpton's on board, he plays the race card all the way through. He just keeps asking for more and more money."
So confront him. It will be difficult at first, what with the MSM defending him by broadcasting his rants and denials hourly but never analyzing them, and by carefully selecting and broadcasting information that supports him, but confrontation will be cheaper and easier in the long run. Besides, we conservatives need corporations to rally around. And we need corporations to boycott as well.
Afterthought: This advice is easy for me to give. I'm not a CEO being shaken down. I don't directly have any "skin in the game," to quote another shakedown artist. But I do indirectly. I have a stock portfolio, and own very small portions of several companies that have been shaken down by Sharpton. Profit, and therefore my dividends, are affected. Since the money is gone anyway, I would advise to confront Sharpton rather than just give in to him.