#BoycottStarbucks

Well, no.


It is karmatic payback that a few years after Starbucks' ridiculously pretentious program to fix racism by writing "Race Together" on coffee cups will now be seen as racist after a YouTube video surfaced of two black men being arrested in a Philadelphia chain over trespassing.
What actually happened? (The story is ongoing.) Apparently two black men--clean cut but wearing street cloths--walked into a Starbucks and took a seat. One asked for the restroom code and was denied because neither he nor his friend had purchased anything. They were waiting for a third man, you see, and they were about to have a business meeting. They were asked to buy something or leave. They refused to buy anything and they refused to leave. The police were called. The police showed up, and asked the non-customers to comply with the manager's orders and leave. They still refused. They were arrested for trespassing, and the arrest was caught on tape and the story went viral.


There's a misconception that trespassing is when you break into a car and steal an iPad. If a business manager asks you to leave and you don't, it is criminal trespassing. If you were denied service, you can sue. These black men weren't denied service. Nor were they practicing a political protest, like the lunch counter sitters of the 1960s. They were engaged in a pissing contest with a white person or American society or the concept of private enterprise, and they lost. Nothing was resolved. They missed out on their business meeting and got arrested.


[Disclaimer: I have been a Starbucks bum numerous times in my life. I sit alone at a table, using the free WiFi. I will always give up my table if a customer needs it. I don't bring additional black guys with me.]


Starbucks bums are a serious problem (okay, not serious), and we should not allow liberal activists to change the subject from the rights and responsibilities of business owners to insure their actual customers are treated well. Though we should all be treated equally by our government, we are not all equal in a private business. Those who spend the most money should receive the best service to encourage repeat business. Those who spend the least should be treated with civility. Those who don't spend at all should be told to fuck off. Welcome to capitalism, bitch!


In my life, I've seen just as many black bums and black customers at various Starbucks throughout Los Angeles. And if you don't notice the bums because they're black makes you racist, not the manager who called the police on them. You must not be looking at black people outside of your preppy friends. When you really hate someone, you don't condemn their behavior. You just ignore them.


This is the bigotry of low expectations. You expect white people to act a certain way, but black people are to be given wide latitude to act like jackasses--whether it's smoking marijuana, saying "nigger" or being unemployed. It is the point where tolerance becomes condescension. This is similar to the Trayvon Martin case in that what began as an episode of racial profiling escalated. The manager shouldn't have called the police so quickly. However, he might not have noticed that the black men were there for only a few minutes. She might've thought they had been there for a half hour or an hour. She didn't notice them because she's colorblind.


Starbucks is worried that this boycott will be a campaign taken upon by their white liberal customers--the ones who spend hundred of dollars a month at their branches. The corporation could draw out this issue, and though it would be factually right, it would lose the PR war. The corporation is sending their employees to sensitivity training and paying these men's tuition. "See? Not racist!"


Now this former manager is going to sue Starbucks for wrongful termination, and the corporation will probably give her a few thousand dollars to go away. She wasn't properly prepared by corporate in the art of being taken out of context.


If a boycott does occur, the people who will suffer most are the people whose incomes are tied to tip jars. The CEO and other high-ranking officials--who never opening condoned racial profiling--will be mildly impacted. The black baristas will suffer the most, as their tips will fall off a cliff. Hardworking black men and women will suffer to protect the "rights" of bums. Good job, liberals. Fixing racism like champs!

Some Darwin Awards 2014 Nominees and One Also-Ran

I'm going to let you all in on a little secret. Whenever anyone anywhere does anything stupid in this world, the first thing black Americans think is: Please don't be a black person. Lady tries to rob a convenience store naked from the waist down? "Don't be a black lady." Knock-out game? "Don't be black kids." Mayor caught smoking crack? "Don't be Marion Barry." (Fortunately that time was Toronto Mayor Bob Ford.) This thought came to my mind immediately upon learning that a kid had tried to hitch a ride to Hawaii in the wheelwell of a commuter jet, miraculously surviving the bitter cold and thin air of high altitude travel in an unpressurized container. This guy surely Googled how to sneak into a commuter jet's wheelwell but he didn't Google what would happen if you fly 20,000 feet in a non-pressurized compartment--where survival of the journey becomes more unlikely than possible. It turns out this kid originally came from Somalia, and though I do not know what desperation this young man was going through that made him think that this was a viable option, but it doesn't change that this was a dumbass move, and he barely avoided winning a Darwin Award.

When someone does something extremely dumbass, and the result of their stupidity is their own death--and they have failed to reproduce--they are to be nominated for the Darwin Awards. As dark as it might be to think about, really, it's for the best that some people don't have children. Outside forces did not cause their deaths--they'd brought it on themselves.

Also this week loon Bryon Smith was convicted of first degree murder in the deaths of two teens who had broken into his home. Like the George Zimmerman case, this defies traditional criminal charges: This is where the victim became the perpetrator, and the victim becomes wholly unsympathetic--and the one man left standing could control the narrative. The castle doctrine should've provided Smith with more authority to kill the intruders--a portion of self-defense erraticism that I actually support. However this guy was undone when he told the truth--he didn't attempt to whitewash what he'd done with conflicting accounts--unlike Zimmerman. Smith clearly tortured those kids--and clearly he should've either lied afterwards or claimed some mental ailment. (Plus they were white.) His inability to stage a cover-up has led to his arrest for the crime.

What is disturbing besides the kids' deaths was the way in which the mainstream media are covering it: Emphasizing how "innocent" and "popular" the white kids were--while burying the fact that they were breaking into homes when the shooting occured. Further they were shot multiple times wheras Trayvon Martin was shot once (Still, the same media that didn't question why Zimmerman had called the police when he didn't see the black kid commit a crime is now not questioning why the pretty white kids had broken into at least one home. The media bent over backwards to make a white girl look innocent while bending over backwards to make a black guy look guilty.) In all likelihood, they were trying to rob Smith's place, and their fun exploration into criminal behavior was interrupted a genuinely damaged individual with guns. What was a home invasion robbery was turned into a juvenile rite of passage because the criminals did not fit the profile and out of fear of appearing insensitive to the dead kids' families. Smith will pay for his crimes for the remainder of his life; but the media's coverage of this case has been inexcusable too.